Leica thoughts...

[Grumpy Badger]

Hi guys.

I've wanted a Leica camera almost as long as I've wanted a Rolex. I'd appreciate the thoughts of those of you who have them.

My Long-Haired General is a pro photographer but her interest (and all her kit) is geared to action/sports photography. Her Canon Eos 1D is an amazing piece of kit but not what melts my butter.

The type of photos I'd love to take would be in the style of the old journalistic images of the Vietnam war, the pic of Che smoking his cigar with his Rolex on etc... (though, of course, with less contentious subject mater!)

I know a lot of the old photo journalists shot Leicas but I don't know whether to go for an old 35mm to get the exact look or a modern digital...

I don't like the idea of "fiddling" with photos. I know it produces great results but, to me, it's cheating and the true art is in the original capture. Of course that means I should go for the 35mm but I feel the digital would put me on a quicker learning curve as I could view my pics as I took them, adjust my settings and learn as I went along.

Please don't try to talk me out of Leica, though. As with when I went to buy my Rolex I already knew that was what I was buying and it was no good showing me the merits of Omega or IWC... That dog won't hunt!

I look forward to hearing your views!

[hunz]

I'm a leica user, fire away. Do you want to shoot film or digital?

Lots of choices from film - M6, M6TTL, M7, MP to digital - M8, M9, S2

Perfect for photojournalism. Leica have some of the best lenses bar non, compact and fast.

They are not cheap, but as you have Rolex's and your wife is a Pro - I guess this will be no surprise!

Happy to answer any Q's you may have buddy

[gaopa]

When I was a film shooter I dreamed of a Leica M series rangefinder camera. In those days I shot Minolta, but did have a nice Contax rangefinder.

However, once I switched to digital I went with the Nikon D series cameras and Nikkor lenses. Now after all of these years with Nikon I'm hooked! Cheers, Bill P.

[subtona]

funny you should mention... i am just about to put my M6ttl up for sale...3 amazing lenses.

if your seriously considering 35mm send me a pm.

that said... Leica is an amazing experience in shooting, it is over the top simple to use and will make you a better photographer by nature of its simplicity.
1)the fact that you never lose sight of the subject is invaluable (slr's block your view the moment the pic is taken)
2)when you press the shutter release it magically takes the photo when you intended it to. (not sometime after)

and it goes perfectly with a 14060m and thats a fact.

[Grumpy Badger]

I love the idea of the 'pure' photography you only truely get with 35mm.

However I'm a complete novice and digital would let me see what I'd taken and fiddle with the settings accordingly til I got the result I wanted. I'd hate to get the perfect opportunity with a 35mm only to find out, weeks later, that all my pics were god-awful!

This really holds no interest for The Long-Haired General so I'm on my own.

Do you think I can ever be happy with the images I could get with digital or is it like the old 'vynal versus CD' argument and I need to man up, buy a 35mm and take a million rolls of film til I learn how to use it!??

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by hunz

They are not cheap, but as you have Rolex's and your wife is a Pro - I guess this will be no surprise!

Happy to answer any Q's you may have buddy

Tell me about it!

Originally Posted by subtona

funny you should mention... i am just about to put my M6ttl up for sale...3 amazing lenses.

if your seriously considering 35mm send me a pm.

and it goes perfectly with a 14060m and thats a fact.

Nice sales pitch... You know JUST how to push my buttons!

I know I'm being a prat but I just don't know whether to play safe with digital or man up and buy a 35mm!

[2careless]

I don't know how much it costs for films and processing in Scotland but here in Aus it costs a fortune. I'd do digital anytime for instant gratification :-)

Also, have you thought about the X1? It's a fixed lens camera but the IQ is just fantastic. It's a small camera that it's possible to point it to people without their resentment, while if you point a big DSLR to them they will not let you take a shot.

I have been thinking of getting the X1, or the Fuji X100 (leaning more to X1) for a trip in Sept. I'll be letting my legs do the zooming

[Grumpy Badger]

This is the sort of image I'm after...


I twisted the Long-Haired Generals arm into doing a photoshoot with her Eos 1D, and the result was amazing, but I'm not sure if a digital image can ever have that 'je ne sais quoi'...

This is what she got...

[2careless]

That's a wonderful shoot! I assume only natural lighting used?

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by 2careless

I don't know how much it costs for films and processing in Scotland but here in Aus it costs a fortune. I'd do digital anytime for instant gratification :-)

That is a concern. Also the quality of most of the local processing labs is p*ss-poor so I'd always have to send my film away.

Originally Posted by 2careless

That's a wonderful shoot! I assume only natural lighting used?

Thanks! I wish she'd do more of that kind of thing. It was all natural light, I was just sitting in the yard about an hour before sunset.

I guess that pic is an example of the benefit of digital... The LHG took a fair few pics to get her settings right and my position right.(that's why there's too much ash on my cigar!) We couldn't have done that with 35mm. (plus, she knows what she's doing to begin with!)

[dsio]

What would be the Omega Speedmaster Pro of cameras? (just playing devil's advocate) ;)

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by dsio

What would be the Omega Speedmaster Pro of cameras? (just playing devil's advocate) ;)

For me...Nikon. I admire them, I just can't love them!

[dsio]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

For me...Nikon. I admire them, I just can't love them!

My iPhone would be an invicta then?

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by dsio

My iPhone would be an invicta then?

You must be getting better shots with yours than I get with mine! My iPhone pics would be the equivalent of those little £10 rubber band things with a digital watch moulded into them!

[Cru Jones]

i'm no expert, but, i'll express my thoughts, anyway!

imo, in this day and age, and with you not being already a "pro", i'd consider going with a good digital kit and learning photoshop. you will get the effect you're going after at a fraction of the cost and hassle of 35mm. and, you'll get the benefit of having something more versatile for when you're not trying to re-enact old photos.

if having an old-school leica is a dream, though, by all means, go for it, but, be prepared to be dissapointed in the beginning, as no matter the equipment, it's the photographer that makes the photo.

just my two cents....

[Grumpy Badger]

Cru, what you say makes a lot of sense. I'm very bad at being bad at things so my worry is I'd be disheartened if I got poor results to start with. There really is nowhere to hide with 35mm!
My problem is I would feel 'dirty' using Photoshop! I'm an old school kind of guy, and digitally remastered anything just seems like cheating! I can't sing but I know there are machines which could make me sound like Tom bloody Jones!!!

[dsio]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

You must be getting better shots with yours than I get with mine! My iPhone pics would be the equivalent of those little £10 rubber band things with a digital watch moulded into them!

I'm like the Ansel Adams of iPhones.

[TswaneNguni]

Leica V-Lux 2 owner :-) Previously Canon G9.

You WANT a M9 !!!!

Enjoy !!!

[Esexx]

One word...

M9!!!


I am a Nikon shooter, but I lust after a M9 with a NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/0.95 ASPH!!!!

I will have a tough decision, M9 with a 50mm with a 50mm Noc or a RED Sub.

[Route 66]

I've also longed for a Leica since my film days in the 70s. Back then I was also in love with medium format cameras. I yearned for both a Leica 35mm and a Hasselblad 6x6 (cm) cameras. I ended up buying a Canon 35mm and a Mamiya medium format camera, but the love affair with Leica continues to this day. If I were going to buy a Leica today, it would be the M9 because I like the idea of an old school rangefinder camera. I just have a hard time as an amateur, justifying the purchase of a $6000 (USD) camera without lenses. I still may do it one day though.

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by Stevarn

I've also longed for a Leica since my film days in the 70s. Back then I was also in love with medium format cameras. I yearned for both a Leica 35mm and a Hasselblad 6x6 (cm) cameras. I ended up buying a Canon 35mm and a Mamiya medium format camera, but the love affair with Leica continues to this day. If I were going to buy a Leica today, it would be the M9 because I like the idea of an old school rangefinder camera. I just have a hard time as an amateur, justifying the purchase of a $6000 (USD) camera without lenses. I still may do it one day though.

I've just been reading all the M9 reviews, it does seem like one hell of a camera. Like you, though, I'd struggle to justify to myself that my 'toy' would cost more than the Long-Haired Generals pro kit.

[Route 66]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

I've just been reading all the M9 reviews, it does seem like one hell of a camera. Like you, though, I'd struggle to justify to myself that my 'toy' would cost more than the Long-Haired Generals pro kit.

I understand, but as the saying goes, you only live once. Wait a minute, am I trying to convince you, or myself.

[Grumpy Badger]

Is it sacrilege to ask if something like a D-Lux-3 would be a good thing to get started with and then buy a 35mm once I was good enough or would something like that be too simple and I still wouldn't have learned enough once I made the switch to 35mm?

[Grumpy Badger]

Originally Posted by Stevarn

I understand, but as the saying goes, you only live once. Wait a minute, am I trying to convince you, or myself.

Easy answer... Both!

[hunz]

[QUOTE=Grumpy Badger;2522748]This is the sort of image I'm after...


Ok, you have style. And an eye for classic photography.

Option 1: FILM - Hardcore route - get a Leica M2 (or M4) & a 35mm Summicron 1st version or 50mm Dual Range/Rigid summicron (these are 1960's lenses! same period as the photo) + some back and white Tri-X 400 film (the photojournalists standard bar none, ok maybe also Ilford) + handheld lightmeter.

Option 2: FILM - Less hardcore (as these cameras have a lightmeter) - get a Leica M6, M6TTL, MP (new classic) or M7 & same lenses as above.

Option 3: DIGITAL - Less painful as there is no film to buy, or film processing and scanning - Get a Leica M8 or M9 & same lenses as above in 1 (but only the 50/2.0 Rigid - the dual range will not work on the M8 or M9).

Don't get the latest Leica ASPH lenses as these will be too clinical most of the time. That's why the Rolex ad you like looks the way it does, those vintage lenses are the best there is for B&W classic photography. There's a look to them which the newest lenses will not replicate, and that's why they are highly sought after but affordable when compared to Rolex's still (unless you get the 0.95 Noct or something similarly exotic - but again its a new lens design, hence renders different to 60's lenses)

If you have ever picked up a chrome 35/2.0 summicron of 50/2.0 you will love the build quality and precision. Just like Rolex's - built like tanks and last a lifetime if looked after. Lets put it this way, I have never lost money on Leica lenses, much like Rolexes I guess. But those Canon lenses your LHG has.. well she won't be getting the money she laid out for them!

Feel free to PM if you like or post more Q's

[TswaneNguni]

D-Lux 5 looks quite handy to me.V-Lux 2 is just more versatile for my needs and compact enough ..... My pics look great.No complaints.G9 broke the second time now ...that excluded the G12 for me.

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

Is it sacrilege to ask if something like a D-Lux-3 would be a good thing to get started with and then buy a 35mm once I was good enough or would something like that be too simple and I still wouldn't have learned enough once I made the switch to 35mm?

no, i think that's a perfectly sensible approach, and will net you a fairly portable piece for those days you don't want to lug around a 35mm leica.

to add an extra wrinkle, as i'm sure you're aware, the leica compact is simply a rebranded panasonic (leica gets panasonic innards, and panasonic gets leica's lens). you can save a bit of cash if you go panasonic....

i have a canon S95...full manual controls and similar performance in a smaller package than the leica/panasonic.

[hunz]

Originally Posted by Grumpy Badger

Is it sacrilege to ask if something like a D-Lux-3 would be a good thing to get started with and then buy a 35mm once I was good enough or would something like that be too simple and I still wouldn't have learned enough once I made the switch to 35mm?

I have the D-Lux 4, and the D-Lux 5 is the latest. Its a great all round P&S. Versatile but no viewfinder. There's also the X1. But again no built in VF.

Thats where the Leica M's have their own charm and style of photography. The Fuji X100 is another option to consider. Very hot camera of the moment, its not a Leica - but its worth checking out, and pretty damn fine. Fixed lens, but its not a true rangefinder camera, but may suit your style/needs

[Route 66]

I don't know if it's true or not but I've heard that the D-Lux 5 is a re-badged Panasonic LX5.

[boa2]

Originally Posted by hunz

I have the D-Lux 4, and the D-Lux 5 is the latest. Its a great all round P&S. Versatile but no viewfinder. There's also the X1. But again no built in VF.

Thats where the Leica M's have their own charm and style of photography. The Fuji X100 is another option to consider. Very hot camera of the moment, its not a Leica - but its worth checking out, and pretty damn fine. Fixed lens, but its not a true rangefinder camera, but may suit your style/needs

I'm probably going to get a D-Lux 5 myself. I find so many of the Leica images to be uniquely moving. I love the X1 as well, but my wife thinks the images have a "creepy" look to them. I'm thinking of going with the D-Lux 5 and getting the M9 when the pinata has enough change in it. Either that, or I do like much of what I've seen of the Panasonic GF1 with the Leica macro lens, which would be a much less expensive--yet still rewarding--combination.

Thank you all for your comments. I'm really starting to get photography obsessed, and am grateful for your enabling.