Whats the big deal about Leica
Hello to all,
Excellent points made. Leica IS a camera to last your lifetime and perhaps your heirs lifetime. Buy one or two and you will never NEED another unless your a Combat cameraman, (they get broken, flooded and wore out) or into long telephoto or extreme wide or fisheye or microscopy. In those cases one might want a SLR type camera.
The M bodies and lenses are supurb, virtually flawless. If you shoot slides/transparencies you will PERHAPS see the quality difference DEPENDING on what camera/optical system you are comparing it to. IF you got your exposures spot on, IF your chosen processor got the processing spot on. As for the final product being prints, a very old saying is "Exposed through a Leica, printed through a Coke bottle bottom". If your printer or you for that matter is printing through a "Lord know what" enlarger lens, perhaps dirty, at a less than optimum f stop, the film plane is not parallel with the easel, you WILL NOT be seeing any of the Leica magic on those prints. If you have the skill and knowlege for complete control over EVERYTHING from the moment of exposure until you hold and view that dry print, Then you can say you are holding a Leica image. Few people can say this truthfully.
Another old saying "If you can't make them good, then make them big". I've always held that if you want a big print, use a bigger piece of film. If you wanted to try something, try this. Take a 35mm camera, with a normal 5cm lens, yes a Leica with a chron will do. Load it with your favorite film, B&W is fine. THEN beg or borrow a 2 1/4 camera such as a Yashica mat 124. Keep it cheap, no need for a Rollei or Hasse. Load your cheap Yashica with the same emulsion as was loaded in the Leica. Take them both out on a tripod with cable release and shoot the same objects. Process both rolls together in the same chemicals and then print the 35mm negs and the 6x6 negs to perhaps 11x14 inches. It would be ideal if they could be printed with the same enlarger. You WILL be amazed at how much better the 6x6 print looks compared to the 35mm enlargement, even when exposed on a relatively cheap 6x6 camera. Square inches of film always wins, no matter how "Perfect" the 35mm lens is. NOW back to the comment of "If you can't make them good, make them big". If you wish to make prints no bigger than a 5x7 or 6x9 inch print then 35 mm is BRILLIANT! I can honestly say that a properly controlled print from a full frame 35mm negative can rival (I didn't say beat) a contact print from a 5x7 negative. If you only make 4x6 prints produced by commercial photo finishers. It makes NO DIFFERENCE if you expose that film through a Leitz lens, a Argus C-3, a NIkon lens what have you, as long as that camera and lens are working up to specification, the film is fresh and your exposures are correct. At 4x6 inches you will HAVE TO do CLOSE side by side comparisons to see a difference and on the same roll on the same day, do to chemical and equipment changes at the printers. I see NO advantage image wise in using a M series Leica system for commercial, machine made prints less than 5 or 6 times enlargement.
In the past 40 years of being a caretaker and bodyguard for my Leicas, worring about knocking them into solid objects, someone stealing them, tying the camera bag to a table leg when out to dinner, slinging it under my arm in a suit coat and trying to dance with a lady, not going in areas where it will be recognized by punks that will mug you for it, trying to keep it dry in the rain, cool in the summer, warm in the winter, locked up when not at home, dear Lord what a slave I've been to my Leicas.
So now I am a retired Combat Cameraman/ Photojournalist/ picture maker. My Leicas, a IIIF, three M-3s, one M2 and a M6 are STILL locked up. So are my Nikon F and F4AS and the Hasse and the Rollei TLR. I still use them on the odd occasion. They are brilliant cameras for the working man, I'd say the best a photographer can get. Most of my shooting now is either printed by myself, yes on a Leitz enlarger, to believe it or not 4x6 or 5x7 inches, (not big but very good). If I want bigger prints, I drag out a 2 1/4 camera or a 4x5 or a 5x7 camera. One can only display so many 16x20 prints on the walls of a house. If I'm not doing my own B&W prints, then I shoot color and have it printed by a semi-custom commercial printer. My 35 mm cameras, I use, you might ask. Well I use a Voigtlander Bessa R with either a 61LD Industar or a Industar 50 or a Jupiter 8 or a Jupiter 3. My other casual use cameras are a Zorki 4 or a FED 1 or a Kiev 4. All with FSU lenses. They are GREAT FUN. As I said earlier for a 4x6 inch print it DOES NOT matter what camera or lens you use as long as it meets specification. Even at 5x7 the cameras I use will compete image quality wise with virtually ANYTHING using the same size film. These cameras will never be treasured by my heirs, have virtually no resale value and as one fellow said " He who steals my cameras, steals junk". They are fun to shoot, they produce wonderful images and I don't overly worry about them. I can go out and enjoy myself. Of the cameras mentioned the Voigtlander is the one to go for, superb.
HAVE FUN! Use the correct camera for the job. Don't get hung up on myth and mystique. The camera is only a tool, and what a fun tool it is. Any camera and film of today will produce images that Sudek, Stieglitz, Atget, or Bresson would be proud to record. You will see more difference and character change in your images by just changing a film and or developer combination than you will by changing camera brand or lens brand.
You have now heard a lifetime of experience with Leica cameras reduced to a few paragraphs. Make what you like of it. Now go out and make some worthwhile and memorable images and STOP losing sleep about what your images will look like if You just had a Leica.
All the best,
Sam Hotton
]
. If you can shoot with an M camera and not appreciate that confluence of design and execution that not one other single camera model comes close to, then save your money.
