Why Buy a Leica?

[RoBBo]

We've got an MD body sitting around at the studio where I work, used to think Leica Schmeika...
And honestly I still don't think they're worth what most people pay for them, but having fondled that thing for a while...
I'll say, I'd really be down for an M3SS, especially at what they seem to be costing these days, stick some of that CV glass on there, and talk about bang for your buck eh?

 

[zenrhino]

This view competely ignores the unalloyed pleasure of arguing for arguing's sake (not of course that I personally do)!

We call that "the internet" these days.

 

[zeroseven]

What you see is what you get? Only if you're using one of the few cameras with 100% finder. Most don't at around 95%. Only if your eye is centered in the eyepiece or you've offset the image.
It is horses for courses though and both RF and SLR have their place in the tool box.

Sorry John, I should have been clearer. I was referring to focus.

 

[removed account4]

why buy anything?
do it because you want to ...

 

[cotdt]

why buy anything?
do it because you want to ...

but why would you want to?

 

[Uhner]

but why would you want to?

Beats me. Is it still the film loading that puts you off?

oh i don't actually have the leica m7 yet but i'm considering getting this toy. the only thing holding me back is the weird film loading.

 

[removed account4]

but why would you want to?

to get to the other side?

 

[Peter Black]

to get to the other side?

Good one! If anyone is really thinking of buying a Leica though, I'd suggest they skip the M bayonet and go for an older model since we all know that Leica threads go on forever!

 

[eddym]

I can't believe this thread has gone on for 283 posts (!) when the answer to the topic question is so simple!

Why Buy a Leica?

...Because they don't give them away, silly!!

 

[Lee L]

I'm sure we're all aware of the contribution of declining numbers of pirates to global warming. http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.gif But it occurs to me that the increasing number of more-heat-than-light contentious pro/con Leica internet threads might possibly be a contributing factor.

Has anyone seen any solid analysis of this correlation?

Lee

 

[Dan Fromm]

Lee, you must not be aware of the law of conservation of hot air. If it weren't vented in this discussion, it would be vented in another.

 

[eddym]

I'm sure we're all aware of the contribution of declining numbers of pirates to global warming. http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.gif But it occurs to me that the increasing number of more-heat-than-light contentious pro/con Leica internet threads might possibly be a contributing factor.

Has anyone seen any solid analysis of this correlation?

Lee

Yes, but with one flip of the lever I flushed it all down the toilet.

 

[drdensen]

Just got an m7. All I can say is "awesome" I trades my digital gear for it and a 50mm f2.0 sum.
Never been happier with a camera. I also had a mamiya 7. Sold it few years back for digital. I think I'll stick with leica m 7. Larger film though much better, but at normal viewing distances you really can't see much difference.

 

[vet173]

well, i wish i had the kind of money to live by that philosophy!

That time usually comes after the kids move out.

 

[Chaplain Jeff]

"...my main camera now is a voigtlander R3A. i have been very satisfied with this camera and the CV lenses. for many years, i have wanted to own a leica camera, but i have began to wonder recently- why? yes, some of my favorite photographers shoot with leicas, but is the great expense of these cameras worth it?..."

Hello,

I see this thread started a while ago - don't know if the originator is still reading or not - or has probably already made a decision. As the thread continues anyway, here are my thoughts:

If you're happy with what you've got, stay with it.

Everytime I think, "Hmmm, I NEED an M7 or a custom made MP," and list off all the reasons why, I pick up my M5 (or my CLE or even my Minolta Model 35 or Super A - yeah, I'm a Minolta shooter - but don't hate me for it) and shoot for a day. The fact is, the equipment I have takes great photos and I enjoy using it.

I recently bought a new camera, but it wasn't another RF - I am in a country where there is no film processing so I broke down and bought a DSLR (again - I had sold my D1H, D2H and Fuji Pro with all the lenses a few years ago out of frustration). Why? Because in this environment I really NEED a DSLR. I prefer - and will continue to shoot with my M3 and M5 (the CLE is going home - too dusty and rocky here for my conscience now that I have good TTL flash) while here in country.

Once I'm home I expect to go right back to all or mostly film photography. WHy? Because I like it and it works.

So, if you like your Cosina, err... Voightlander, keep shooting it. If it limits you, get a Leica, or a Minolta.

Jeff M

 

[daleeman]

I'm sure we're all aware of the contribution of declining numbers of pirates to global warming. http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.gif But it occurs to me that the increasing number of more-heat-than-light contentious pro/con Leica internet threads might possibly be a contributing factor.

Has anyone seen any solid analysis of this correlation?

Lee

You tell them Lee!

That other Lee
Yup its daleeman
(insert theme from Batman 1960s TV show)

 

[blockend]

Long time lurker signing up to join the fray. As a keen street photographer I should be target Leica market but I've never been able to justify the financial outlay. Fact is I usually carry two, often three 35mm bodies with wide, standard and short tele lenses, a practical decision based on 35 years shooting. The bodies clunk together, get wet, dumped on the car floor and the camera gets stuck into places it's not always welcome. I don't give it a second thought but with 5-10k of gear I might.

All my Nikkormats with wide Fstop prime glass probably wouldn't buy one quality Leica lens. If anyone wants to sponsor me I'd go Leica in a moment and who knows, one of these days I may blow it all on some serious German glassware but having used other folks Leicas - and very nice they were - I still reckon their value is at least 100% overcooked on any sensible comparison.

 

[Krzys]

Of course it's heresy, but I'll be willing to bet... you couldn't tell the difference between an image made with a CV lens and a Leica lens.

I just have to say that I usually can. CV lenses are way to high in contrast for my liking and it usually shows.

 

[andrewkirkby]

There are three reasons why i would buy a Leica:

Extremely high quality lenses, the best in 35mm.
Compact, quiet
Sensual experience. It feels nice to the touch, far more than any Oriental camera.

It is is a camera that does not get in the way of taking pictures. I have Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad SLRs and i find that i am able to think quicker with the Leica, looking for a picture rather than trying to compose one in a viewfinder.

 

[blockend]

There's an old quote, said only half in jest, that early Leicas took such great photographs because their viewfinders were so lousy - the idea being that only the boldest, most dynamic compositions showed themselves through the spyhole. It's probably bunk but I believe viewfinder comparisons provide few clues to good shots. Indeed nowadays I find myself actually holding a camera to my eye less and less. A wide lens gives sufficient depth of field not to trouble over see-saw fine focus, especially if it means you'll miss the shot.

Anyone exclusively shooting film today is at least three parts romantic whatever pragmatic justifications they comfort themselves with. Leica's heritage fits the miniature camera folkstory perfectly but it's not the only tale around. The camera that shoots most frames is the winner, whatever the manufacturer. The ones on a shelf are as dead as mutton stew.

 

[fotch]

.........as dead as mutton stew.

What is live mutton stew?

 

[Ian Grant]

What is live mutton stew?

An old sheep, needs a lot of cooking

Ian

 

[5stringdeath]

The bodies clunk together, get wet, dumped on the car floor and the camera gets stuck into places it's not always welcome.

Huh, that's how I treated my Leicas ......

 

[Bateleur]

Perhaps it’s an irrational affair but for a light tight box with a shutter and a viewing/focus attachment that is now sixty years old and has had new shutter curtains made for it a few years ago and despite a few minor dings and scratches looks and feels great. Simply I have confidence in the camera. The magic is in the lens, undoubtedly, but it’s a marriage, of form, functionality and reassuring quality that I as an amateur perhaps don’t need (or deserve) and while I love the lenses, it’s the body I caress.

 

[blockend]

It's certainly true that a camera you enjoy using is more likely to be taken with you and consequently get the shot. On the other hand I've recently starting buying the plastic fantastic SLRs of the 1990s. They have none of the qualities of a Leica, or indeed my old school Nikons, but they are dirt cheap to buy, highly automated, often come with decent glass and are light to carry.
It's a different buzz from the heritage click - more of a fizz-whirr-slap - but the negatives have as high a hit rate as my classics and the change is fun. And who is to condemn the joy of foolin' round with cameras?