A Kiev with a J-8 or J-12 would be just as good a choice.
A Kiev with a J-8 or J-12 would be just as good a choice.Because it offers yet another opportunity for owners to claim exclusive rights to the history of photography. More seriously, it changes a good idea into an exercise in one-upmanship.
I realise that in the end these are all personal choices, but if you were embarking on a similar undertaking, where would you "Draw the Line"?
The Leica directive raises my suspicions about the project as a whole. Finding a Leica of any age that doesn't require a CLA (at least) and a thorough overhaul (more likely), is an onerous requirement just to take pictures. Add a lens that makes shooting a Leica more worthwhile than any other small camera...
I use a Rollei 35S with an accessory RF that mounts in the flash shoe, I don't understand their logic putting a rather nice Sonnar on a scale focussing camera. I use a couple other scale focus cameras, so the RF was worth purchasing.I had a QL17 G3 as well, used it for a couple of years before I got the Contax G1. Regrettably I sold all that gear (including 2 Rolleiflexes!) at a price much lower than that obtainable today. I used the proceeds to buy a DSLR which was subsequently stolen...
I am also a former Rollei 35 owner, and can confirm that scale focusing is a bit of a PITA compared to even the gloomiest rangefinder.
The article begins with first step, buy a Leica. Like the old cookery book joke, first, shoot your tiger. This isn't 1933. Or even 1954. A Leica isn't required to take photographs. It isn't even needed to take film photographs. A Leica isn't even necessary to take rangefinder photographs on film, but that's the condition so everyone's on the same page. It's a pointless hurdle to carry out the brief.Youxin Ye is a good first stop on this journey. He may have an M2 already to go if you reach out.
The article begins with first step, buy a Leica. Like the old cookery book joke, first, shoot your tiger. This isn't 1933. Or even 1954. A Leica isn't required to take photographs. It isn't even needed to take film photographs. A Leica isn't even necessary to take rangefinder photographs on film, but that's the condition so everyone's on the same page. It's a pointless hurdle to carry out the brief.
The second error is to state a Leica is "free". That's not the case unless you're exceedingly lucky. Good condition Leicas aren't cheap. Good condition Leicas with a guaranteed recent overhaul by someone who knows what they're doing, are certainly not cheap. Cheap Leicas that need an overhaul aren't cheap if you want them to work properly. Buying a Leica that'll flawlessly run through up to 6 films a week for a year, won't be free when you come to sell it. In fact I'd go as far as to say that an inexpensive Leica is one of the worst second hand cameras if you want to put 300 films through it to complete the project. If you want your Leica to work with anything except a 50mm, and use your rangefinder to focus, it won't be old or cheap.
Before anyone claims it's me who's cheap, and I simply don't understand Leicas or rangefinders or both, I really liked my M5. Not enough to keep it forever, but it's still my favourite Leica. I liked the M3 I had use of, but not enough to buy my own. I very much like my Kiev and its lenses, at least as much as my Leicas and perhaps enough to buy a Contax. But I'd probably get a Nikon rangefinder if I bought another. So I'm not Leica-phobic or an SLR fundamentalist, I just don't get why it's necessary to even mention the company in relation to a project like this. If you already own a Leica of known reliability, it's as good as anything to shoot with. If you need to have a camera with you at all times (like, literally as per instructions), there are plenty of cameras I'd use before a Leica. Like my XA3. Or a digital MFT camera. Sticking with one lens is a good idea. The rest is propaganda.
I think virtually everyone who posted a comment to that old article made the same point.The article begins with first step, buy a Leica. Like the old cookery book joke, first, shoot your tiger. This isn't 1933. Or even 1954. A Leica isn't required to take photographs. It isn't even needed to take film photographs. A Leica isn't even necessary to take rangefinder photographs on film, but that's the condition so everyone's on the same page. It's a pointless hurdle to carry out the brief.
The second error is to state a Leica is "free". That's not the case unless you're exceedingly lucky. Good condition Leicas aren't cheap. Good condition Leicas with a guaranteed recent overhaul by someone who knows what they're doing, are certainly not cheap. Cheap Leicas that need an overhaul aren't cheap if you want them to work properly. Buying a Leica that'll flawlessly run through up to 6 films a week for a year, won't be free when you come to sell it. In fact I'd go as far as to say that an inexpensive Leica is one of the worst second hand cameras if you want to put 300 films through it to complete the project. If you want your Leica to work with anything except a 50mm, and use your rangefinder to focus, it won't be old or cheap.
Before anyone claims it's me who's cheap, and I simply don't understand Leicas or rangefinders or both, I really liked my M5. Not enough to keep it forever, but it's still my favourite Leica. I liked the M3 I had use of, but not enough to buy my own. I very much like my Kiev and its lenses, at least as much as my Leicas and perhaps enough to buy a Contax. But I'd probably get a Nikon rangefinder if I bought another. So I'm not Leica-phobic or an SLR fundamentalist, I just don't get why it's necessary to even mention the company in relation to a project like this. If you already own a Leica of known reliability, it's as good as anything to shoot with. If you need to have a camera with you at all times (like, literally as per instructions), there are plenty of cameras I'd use before a Leica. Like my XA3. Or a digital MFT camera. Sticking with one lens is a good idea. The rest is propaganda.
The claim is based on the idea a Leica will teach you about photography. A Leica will teach you a number of things, like how to put film in a bottom loading camera, or how to compose with one viewfinder and focus with another (depending on model). What it won't teach you to do is take a good photograph.It's necessary to mention a Leica because they are unique in the sense that they are arguably the top name in 35mm cameras.
Interesting. Common sense prevails it would seem.I think virtually everyone who posted a comment to that old article made the same point.
The title of the article was "One Camera, One Lens, One Year" not "One Leica, One Lens, One Year." The concept of the article has nothing to do with Leica. It's inclusion was gratuitous. As comments here and there attest, any one camera and lens will be sufficient to derive benefit from the exercise. It's about honing you photographic vision, not learning how to use a particular camera, which takes about an hour if you are slow on the uptake.It's necessary to mention a Leica because they are unique in the sense that they are arguably the top name in 35mm cameras. Can any 645 or larger format make "better" images? Of course, same as almost any SLR is better for anything other than 35mm/50mm lens photographs. But the Leica is a Leica and nothing else is. As for cost, user condition M2 or beater M6+ LTM 35mm lens would suffice for 35mm use and those can be found with lens for sub $1K USD.
It's like recommending that people drive a Porsche 911 of some kind for a year, daily. Only then would they know what it is like to drive a Porsche 911 daily for a year. With other makes or models, you can come close, or get cars that perform better...but it's not that exact same experience, and after the experience, you have the knowledge you crossed that project off. I once rode my motorcycle to Alaska. People have been to AK and they have no concept of what I went through to get there on a motorcycle by myself. People have driven cars and RVs and trucks up there, but only by taking a motorcycle self-supported can you know what the rider goes through getting up there. What is so hard about this concept?
You could say the same thing about shooting a Mamiya 7. Arguably the best 120 RF ever made. A year with a Leica would give you no concept of a year with a Mamiya 7.
I've been reading the original "One Camera, One Lens, One Year" article, more formally titled "The Leica as Tutor.", and I've been thinking about embarking on a similar project.
What I can't figure out is how strictly to apply the rules; I know I'll be breaking the "Leica only" one, probably with a Kodak Retina, but where does it end?
I reckon I'll be sticking to HP5 and LC-29, but are push and pull processing in the spirit of the "Challenge?" What about filters (either "contrast" or neutral density)? What about flash, for that matter?
I'm not currently set up to wet print, but I'm fairly happy with my - currently multi-format - dev and scan setup.
Stretching the rules too far (in particular the one about filters) would probably mean using my Nikon FE instead, which would "dilute" the challenge still further.
I realise that in the end these are all personal choices, but if you were embarking on a similar undertaking, where would you "Draw the Line"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?