Leica rangefinder appreciation

REEM

A
REEM

  • 1
  • 0
  • 11
Kitahara Jinja

D
Kitahara Jinja

  • 2
  • 0
  • 42
Custom Cab

A
Custom Cab

  • 4
  • 1
  • 58
Table for four.

H
Table for four.

  • 11
  • 0
  • 112

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,601
Messages
2,761,715
Members
99,412
Latest member
Old_Tech
Recent bookmarks
0

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,491
Format
35mm RF
I have always thought that the best Leica design is the Leica II. However, I have used a Leica M2 for many years, in the belief that it is the best practical design for optimum speed and function. More recently I am thinking the Leica IIIF is probably preferable to any M series camera, due to its smaller size and tactile handling, coupled with the dual magnified focus and composure viewfinder. Please note I mention this with a view to only using a 50mm lens. What do others think?
 

250swb

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,459
Location
Peak District
Format
Multi Format
Le t me know what you are taking, because spiritually I'd love some way to think a Barnack Leica is better than an M Leica on any level. Disclosure, I have two IIIF (which I enjoy using), and four M Leica. And if only limited to 50mm lenses then a Nikon rangefinder, such as the SP is a better option because of it's viewfinder magnification.
 
Last edited:

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,966
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
I like the Barnack Leica in terms of size, but find the dual finders squinty. If i were primarily a 50mm shooter, i'd be happy with a lllg. I love using the accessory finders especially working with hyperfocal distance, but honestly when all is said & done I prefer the M (especially the M2 & M4)....when/if size is an issue...the the CL is a charm for me
IMG_9176.JPG
IMG_7131 2.jpg
 
OP
OP
cliveh

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,491
Format
35mm RF
Le t me know what you are taking, because spiritually I'd love some way to think a Barnack Leica is better than an M Leica on any level. Disclosure, I have two IIIF (which I enjoy using), and four M Leica. And if only limited to 50mm lenses then a Nikon rangefinder, such as the SP is a better option because of it's viewfinder magnification.

I just think the Barnack Leica has a tactile quality that is unique. Granted, it may not be as fast to use, but it has that je ne sais quoi that makes it so special. Some years ago I had a Leica IIIg which is often considered as the ultimate Barnack Leica and I could not get on with it. It felt like it had over stepped the mark in form and function. I only took one picture with it that I put on the gallery:-

Lyme Regis - England APUG.jpg
 
Last edited:

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,524
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
When in the Air Force we had M2 and 3s, a couple of lens, when a working PJ I picked up a IIIG, smaller, I did like the duel rangefinder viewfinder combo, loading could be pain, but build quality was so good. Never had the money to invest in a M4, 5 or 6. Saying that my dream rangefinder was the Nikon Sp with motor drive.
 

250swb

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
1,459
Location
Peak District
Format
Multi Format
I just think the Barnack Leica has a tactile quality that is unique. Granted, it may not be as fast to use, but it has that je ne sais quoi that makes it so special.

I don't know then, what is more important, tactile quality, or making photographs? This touchy feelie approach is OK, but appreciating the feel of a Barnack Leica is a long way from appreciating everything else. Even HCB changed cameras as soon as he could, so he didn't look back over his shoulder by hanging on to wistful longings for the old days. I love Barnack Leica's but they are for 'happy days' when you leave an M at home and when practicality is never going to come into the equation. Clearly people could applaud them in their day because they were the best option, but we don't need to uncritically carry that applause on into another era. They are worthy of appreciation, everybody should have one, but that's about it.
 
OP
OP
cliveh

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,491
Format
35mm RF
I don't know then, what is more important, tactile quality, or making photographs? This touchy feelie approach is OK, but appreciating the feel of a Barnack Leica is a long way from appreciating everything else. Even HCB changed cameras as soon as he could, so he didn't look back over his shoulder by hanging on to wistful longings for the old days. I love Barnack Leica's but they are for 'happy days' when you leave an M at home and when practicality is never going to come into the equation. Clearly people could applaud them in their day because they were the best option, but we don't need to uncritically carry that applause on into another era. They are worthy of appreciation, everybody should have one, but that's about it.
your post suggests that improvements in design and technological advantages are chronological. I don't agree with that and the Leica II is a perfect example of the best camera design in the history of photography.
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,966
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
I just think the Barnack Leica has a tactile quality that is unique. Granted, it may not be as fast to use, but it has that je ne sais quoi that makes it so special. Some years ago I had a Leica IIIg which is often considered as the ultimate Barnack Leica and I could not get on with it. It felt like it had over stepped the mark in form and function. I only took one picture with it that I put on the gallery:-

View attachment 337937

When i bought my my '34 Leica iii i prowled the shops in Tokyo. It was my intention to buy a lllg. But despite the better finder i bought the black paint iii. Aesthetically it was the more beautiful camera. If i collected cameras, i would still have it but in time, the need to cut the leader and shim modern 35mm cassettes... became more inconvenient.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
309
Location
Co. Antrim, Ireland
Format
35mm RF
In the UK there's a garden hosepipe company called Hozelock. Their washer slection packet contains a perfect shim (which would also do for Soviet cameras).

As in practical terms it's the lens rather than the body that puts the image on to the emulsion for you, using the body you like best seems to me the way to go. I have a II and a IIIf, along with an MDa (with a Bessa-T for the M lenses as well). As the OP limits discussion to 5cm lenses, I'd say that my screwmount Summar and Summitar are as good as my M mount Elmar 50/2.8. I enjoy using the II most, quite often putting on a viewfinder for convenience. The only inconvenience is the absence of strap lugs.
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,400
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
I have always thought that the best Leica design is the Leica II

Why the II instead of the III? The only difference is the II has no slow speeds - which limits its usefulness.

I don't actually see much difference between any of them. Different viewfinders, different loading, different advance - but you get used any of that quickly. I like the smaller size of the III (or IIIa, IIIb). That may be because I've used a III more than any other camera.
 
OP
OP
cliveh

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,491
Format
35mm RF

faberryman

Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
6,048
Location
Wherever
Format
Multi Format
Another paean to the Barnack cameras. Barnack camera owners can't seem to get enough.
 

bjorke

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,253
Location
SF sometimes
Format
Multi Format
13-year-old troll thread, yay! (No, really, yay!)

I used to have a IIIg - stolen alas. Darned thing was always scratching my glasses. M, not so much!
 
Last edited:

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,966
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
From Yesterday at 3:36 PM?

Leica III cameras are not great for people with glasses.

Honestly, I didn't think it made much difference. They're squinty even without glasses, but not unworkable. Although not my favourite....they're pretty nice with a SB00l. I no longer have one, but i sure liked the aesthetic & especially the build quality.
IMG_6046.jpg
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,400
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
Honestly, I didn't think it made much difference. They're squinty even without glasses

I've heard from people that they just couldn't use them because they wore glasses (a guy bought one then sold it immediately). I don't actually find it particularly squinty - but maybe I'm used to it.
 

bjorke

Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,253
Location
SF sometimes
Format
Multi Format
13-year-old troll thread, yay! (No, really, yay!)

I used to have a IIIg - stolen alas. Darned thing was always scratching my glasses. M, not so much!

Bwahahaha my bad. I read the "join date" of our illustrious comrade @cliveh.

Must be my old scratched glasses 😅
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
2,966
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
I've heard from people that they just couldn't use them because they wore glasses (a guy bought one then sold it immediately). I don't actually find it particularly squinty - but maybe I'm used to it.

Don, If I'm using 35mm i'm most often shooting lots from the hip. I'm not saying that as a criticism, but putting the smaller rangefinder to your eye requires more precision that with an M camera. I've used a number of them and loved the build quality of my '34 lll.
 

Besk

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
572
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
Count me in for the IIIF as my favorite. I have an M6 and a CL but hardly use them.

Sometimes I use Leica 50 finder but mostly don't bother.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom