Leica, screw mount or M camera?

[xkaes]

Minolta made LTM lenses from 28mm to 135mm. Many others did too, and most of these are very good and less expensive -- even if they are somewhat harder to find.

 

[cliveh]

You may go out on a date with a M series Leica, but you will fall in love with a Barnak.

 

[snusmumriken]

I suggest you reflect carefully on what you think the 'Leica way of doing things' really is. In my understanding, it has evolved over the years. It isn't consistently a question of superior performance, or longevity, or simplicity, or excellence. There was even a time when professional photographers bought Leica bodies and put Zeiss (or later, Nikon) lenses on them because those were considered superior at the time. My reading of the history is that in the early years/decades, Leica aimed to make a system camera that could do almost any kind of photography. SLRs beat them at that. Later, when Leica had regained the front line in lens design, but other manufacturers had left them behind in terms of technical wizardry and extensive systems, Leica made a virtue out of 'concentrating on the essentials' - which was all their cameras could do anyway. I happily bought into that concept with an M6, at a time when digital was clearly the future, and I have never regretted it. But I remember the debate I had with myself about why I wanted to do this perverse and indefensibly expensive thing. So I do understand where you are at.

I have played with, but never owned, screw-thread Leicas. To me, they don't exactly seem a way of getting acquainted with an M, because they offer such a different package of qualities. If I remember the history correctly, the M3 and IIIg were even in production at the same time: i.e., it wasn't the case that M Leicas immediately replaced LTMs. Compared with M Leicas, LTMs are compact, durable, admirably basic, equally versatile, but also slow and squinty. If that's what you want for your photography, go for it. Bear in mind that these cameras are getting old, so repairs are more likely to be needed, and are expensive if done properly.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Barnacks are only affordable if you are willing to deal with compromised viewfinders.
But they are cheaper for CLA.

If you want show up with Leica, Barnacks are fine and cute.

 

[JerseyDoug]

Another difference between the LTM and M Leicas is the 1.5:1 magnification of the III series Leica rangefinder compared with the (typically) 0.7:1 magnification of the M rangefinder. Focusing on the same object at the same distance with the two cameras the object will appear twice as large in the LTM rangefinder. In my personal experience this is much more important factor in focusing accuracy than the theoretical advantage of a longer rangefinder base length in actual use.

 

[Arthurwg]

I've owned an M3, M4, and currently an M6 with 35mm F2 lens. I also own a IIIF with the F3.5 Elmar, and just for fun a 1c with a 28mm Hector. I use the 50mm auxiliary finder with the 111F and the combination works perfectly, You'll be surprised at just how sharp the Elmar is. Unless money doesn't matter, go with a LTM.

 

[brose]

I bought my first Leica, an M4, a few years ago. Then I got a iiif to check out Barnacks. I use the Barnack with 28, 40, and 50mm accessory finders. The finders add an expense but they transform the Barnack experience. I like both Leicas quite a lot, but the barnack is with me all the time. If I want to shoot the street or need to works fast, which is rarely, I use an OM2 on auto, or a digital.

 

[Huss]

Definitely get a camera.

 

[Moose22]

I pretty much figured out the only real difference between the two is that the barnack leaves me with more of these:

Otherwise, I use them the same way. M3, or iiif.

If you don't like one and want to stick with the other you can sell it for what you paid for it, too. So Huss is right. Just buy a camera. Get something in your hands and see what you think.

 

[NB23]

A leicavit on a Barnack basically transforms it into a mean machine. At least in my hands.

Servicing barnacks is very easy. When they were sold new, they came with service manuals for DIY.

 

[Huss]

A leicavit on a Barnack basically transforms it into a mean machine. At least in my hands.

Of course! Do you have any action sequence shots, perhaps of a kid bouncing a ball?

 

[NB23]

Of course! Do you have any action sequence shots, perhaps of a kid bouncing a ball?

It’s definitely easier, and way more fun, to wind the film with a Leicavit, and keep the camera next to my face m than it is to turn that knob until the next frame, away from my face.

Yes, I tend to maximally work a scene that I like and anticipate.

Some people take only one shot and move away from the scene, somekind of rule they created. Frankly, that is quite poetic but also delusional; it is definitely not a way to get better at shooting Wiseau photography.

 

[Moose22]

Checked the internets -- leicavits cost 3-4x as much as my camera and lens together cost me.

Or more. Some are asking a pretty penny.

Not that I don't see the usefulness, but there's something funny about the oddball accessory to "fix" a "problem" with the design being way more expensive than the core machine. Kind of like shoe mount viewfinders costing almost as much as the camera did.

(note, I neither see the Barnack as problematic or in need of fixing.I just lack better words for this)

 

[NB23]

Checked the internets -- leicavits cost 3-4x as much as my camera and lens together cost me.

Or more. Some are asking a pretty penny.

Not that I don't see the usefulness, but there's something funny about the oddball accessory to "fix" a "problem" with the design being way more expensive than the core machine. Kind of like shoe mount viewfinders costing almost as much as the camera did.

(note, I neither see the Barnack as problematic or in need of fixing.I just lack better words for this)

Leicavit-M were less than 500$ until a few years ago.

Barnack Leicavits were 300$

The Legendary Tom Abrahamsson’s Rapidwinder were 200-ish.

The fact is, those accessories were cheap accesories until the Asian resellers took over.
From what I saw, what happened is that the asian resellers bought all the stock and now they are gouging.

I remember there was a huge flood of brand new leicavits on sale on ebay, 4-500$ each. When those disappeared, they started to reappear for 1500-2000$, from HK.

 

[Moose22]

Leicavit-M were less than 500$ until a few years ago.

Barnack Leicavits were 300$

The Legendary Tom Abrahamsson’s Rapidwinder were 200-ish.

Oh well. I was late to the game.

Not that it matters, I've a crapload of extremely capable street shooting gear. My street shooting is most certainly only limited by the operator, not the gear.

Even my barnack with its beautiful 5cm collapsible soul machine hasn't made me a great artist. Maybe the next purchase will do it.

 

[NB23]

Oh well. I was late to the game.

Not that it matters, I've a crapload of extremely capable street shooting gear. My street shooting is most certainly only limited by the operator, not the gear.

Even my barnack with its beautiful 5cm collapsible soul machine hasn't made me a great artist. Maybe the next purchase will do it.

Aaahhhhh Soul machine

 

[Oldwino]

Light Lens Lab has recently released their Summicron 8-element clone in a collapsible LTM mount. So that, and the Voigtlander Heliar 40/2.8, are the two newest LTM lenses.
Using a Leica M is certainly easier than using a Barnack, especially if you don’t have a lot of experience with older film cameras. The Barnacks are fiddly. Sometimes.
But if you have some experience and confidence, and enjoy the fiddly bits, the Barnacks are superb cameras and make the same photos as the M. They are smaller, lighter, and cost a third of the M cameras.

 

[cinestill800T]

I am very much a film newbie, and my second film camera and first rangefinder is a Leica iii. It came in the mail last week, and by the second roll I had figured out how to use it, and now on my third, I'm only a little slower with it than my SLR. I read all the stuff about how diifficult they are to use, but truly they are not.

I got mine for $238 from KEH. Very happy with it and I would recommend it to anyone who's on the fence. The one peeve that I haven't gotten used to is a max speed of 1/500. That kind of sucks, but I'm pretty sure the models after the original iii get 1/1000.

 

[Huss]

It’s definitely easier, and way more fun, to wind the film with a Leicavit, and keep the camera next to my face m than it is to turn that knob until the next frame, away from my face.

Yes, I tend to maximally work a scene that I like and anticipate.

Some people take only one shot and move away from the scene, somekind of rule they created. Frankly, that is quite poetic but also delusional; it is definitely not a way to get better at shooting Wiseau photography.

So you aent skilled enough to get your shot in one.

It’s ok, not everyone has that kind of talent. The others take multiples, and hope one is decent. It’s ok.

 

[MattKing]

OK you two.
Settle down or we will send you to your (dark or light) rooms!
FWIW, I too often used to like to "work" a scene with 35mm. Somehow, sometimes your "vision" improves as you explore the alternatives and work up to a final result. It isn't machine gunning, but it can mean some straddling.
I came to that approach in my photo-journalism days.

 

[peoplemerge]

Think about the shooting style first, pick a focal length, then the lens, and camera last.

Mingle with a people and take street shots? 35mm Elmar for you, M. Bresson! A iiif or even prewar will do nicely, in matching chrome or black.

Up in your face in the middle of action? A Voigtlander 12mm and Bessa L. Look, ma, no rangefinder.

Intimate low light portraits? A single coated Summitar (50mm) with pushed Tri-X.

Events, or fast moving portraits? Skip the rangefinders entirely, go back to SLRs for all focal length over 50mm. And why would you? All the lens design advantages that rangefinders have are in wide angles.

My list is all LTM. Why? For a year, I shot with an M6 with a set of the most beautiful of M lenses. Every time I left the house with that supermodel, I was jealously guarded against foes that would taker her from me, the careless splash of a cocktail, even at home, I shut her away.

If I could only have one camera, then maybe. It’s tempting. But no, I really prefer large format anyway, and my medium format system provides more professional images with more ease than the m6 ever did.

The Barnack camera is like a Swiss watch, is fun to shoot, and the attention it garners is pleasant. It suits me better, for now.

 

[snusmumriken]

It’s definitely easier, and way more fun, to wind the film with a Leicavit, and keep the camera next to my face m than it is to turn that knob until the next frame, away from my face.

Yes, I tend to maximally work a scene that I like and anticipate.

Some people take only one shot and move away from the scene, somekind of rule they created. Frankly, that is quite poetic but also delusional; it is definitely not a way to get better at shooting Wiseau photography.

Seems like you need an M, which would be no bigger than your Barnack with all those accessories. Assuming you use your right eye at the viewfinder, an M can be wound without lowering the camera from your face. I am left-eye-dominant myself, so this is un-natural for me. Maybe we should swap? Then again, since I have often missed the Decisive Moment, working the scene would be like flogging a dead horse.

 

[Väinö Louekari]

I have some modern LTM lenses for my Bessa R2; Voigtländer 35 mm f2,5 Color Skopar and 35 mm f2 Ultron. Both work fine (of course with a LTM - M adapter). But there is a lot of old LTM lenses to be had fairly cheap: I have an old Canon 50 mm lens and a very, very good Nikon 50 mm f2 lens. I think LTM is well wort considering.

 

[Besk]

Think about the shooting style first, pick a focal length, then the lens, and camera last.

Mingle with a people and take street shots? 35mm Elmar for you, M. Bresson! A iiif or even prewar will do nicely, in matching chrome or black.

Up in your face in the middle of action? A Voigtlander 12mm and Bessa L. Look, ma, no rangefinder.

Intimate low light portraits? A single coated Summitar (50mm) with pushed Tri-X.

Events, or fast moving portraits? Skip the rangefinders entirely, go back to SLRs for all focal length over 50mm. And why would you? All the lens design advantages that rangefinders have are in wide angles.

My list is all LTM. Why? For a year, I shot with an M6 with a set of the most beautiful of M lenses. Every time I left the house with that supermodel, I was jealously guarded against foes that would taker her from me, the careless splash of a cocktail, even at home, I shut her away.

If I could only have one camera, then maybe. It’s tempting. But no, I really prefer large format anyway, and my medium format system provides more professional images with more ease than the m6 ever did.

The Barnack camera is like a Swiss watch, is fun to shoot, and the attention it garners is pleasant. It suits me better, for now.

My feelings exactly! Even though I owned an M6 I took my Barnack with me to eastern Europe.

 

[Don_ih]

You don't need to lower a thread-mount Leica to wind the film. Just wind the film - it's a couple of twists with your finger tips.

I recently got a Canon VL - quite cheap - everything working except the self-timer (that makes it more like a Leica IIIa). It's definitely the best-feeling Leica copy I've held - far better than the Feds and Zorkis. And it seems to be every bit as accurate as an Leica. It's perfect for the Elmar 35, since it has a switchable viewfinder (switches between 35 and 50). I already had a very clean 50mm Serenar that is truly an excellent lens. That camera and that lens together - easily just as "Leica" as a Leica - but a significantly lower price-tag.