MCTuomey
Veteran
the dilemma is that those who own a leica will tell you, "no, you're not a snob, you're cogniscenti" and those who don't own one will tell you, "yes, you're a snob."
generally speaking, of course. there will be exceptions.
to paraphrase others, why care? there's so much shooting to do, you could do worse than try a leica. if you don't get on with it, sell it. then you'll really know.
generally speaking, of course. there will be exceptions.
to paraphrase others, why care? there's so much shooting to do, you could do worse than try a leica. if you don't get on with it, sell it. then you'll really know.
JustPlainBill
Established
Leica snob - ?
Leica snob - ?
I'm a newcomer to the RFF but a longtime photographer and Leica user. Learned how magicallly Leicas brought home pictures while in college. Bought my first Leica, a used IIf, in the early 1960s. Ended up buying a used 105mmNikkor f2.5 and a closeout 35mm Nikkor f2.5, both in Leica screwmounts, for it. Added a 50mm Nikkor f1.4 so I'd have a fast lens to take to Europe in 1967. Bought a used M4 in 1969; turned out the focal plane shutter was patched and had to be replaced. Mounted the Nikkor lenses in the Leitz screwmount to bayonet mount adapters and used them on the M4. Bought a M2 that had been used hard by a professional in the early 1970s as my black and white body. A friendly repairman overhauled it. My usually faithful Vivitar 285 no longer flashes when connected to the M4. I now use the M2 I bought in the early 1970s as my primary 35mm camera; it's never returned to the repair shop. The optical vewing unit for a Dual range Summicron went home with me when my former employer closed the photolab and I bought a used DR Summicron without the eyes to
go with it. To my way of thinking your attitude about owning a Leica (and the tilt of your nose) is the important thing about being a "Leica snob" or not. If I had it to do over again, the only thing I'd have done differently would have been to buy a new M4. I've since bought another used M2. Which Leica M camera one chooses depends on the depth of one's pockets and one's preference in focal length of lenses. I like the 35mm focal length and probably use it more than the 50mm, so I chose the M2 and the M4.
JustPlainBill
Leica snob - ?
I'm a newcomer to the RFF but a longtime photographer and Leica user. Learned how magicallly Leicas brought home pictures while in college. Bought my first Leica, a used IIf, in the early 1960s. Ended up buying a used 105mmNikkor f2.5 and a closeout 35mm Nikkor f2.5, both in Leica screwmounts, for it. Added a 50mm Nikkor f1.4 so I'd have a fast lens to take to Europe in 1967. Bought a used M4 in 1969; turned out the focal plane shutter was patched and had to be replaced. Mounted the Nikkor lenses in the Leitz screwmount to bayonet mount adapters and used them on the M4. Bought a M2 that had been used hard by a professional in the early 1970s as my black and white body. A friendly repairman overhauled it. My usually faithful Vivitar 285 no longer flashes when connected to the M4. I now use the M2 I bought in the early 1970s as my primary 35mm camera; it's never returned to the repair shop. The optical vewing unit for a Dual range Summicron went home with me when my former employer closed the photolab and I bought a used DR Summicron without the eyes to
go with it. To my way of thinking your attitude about owning a Leica (and the tilt of your nose) is the important thing about being a "Leica snob" or not. If I had it to do over again, the only thing I'd have done differently would have been to buy a new M4. I've since bought another used M2. Which Leica M camera one chooses depends on the depth of one's pockets and one's preference in focal length of lenses. I like the 35mm focal length and probably use it more than the 50mm, so I chose the M2 and the M4.
JustPlainBill
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
welcome aboard JustPlainBill. Tks for posting.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
JustPlainBill thinks like I do! I dumped my Dual range Summicron when I discovered that at its closest focusing distance it covered exactly the same area as my 90mm Elmarit at its closest focusing distance, and no "eyes" to put on and take off.
I remember that big close-out on LTM Nikkor lenses, and finders too! $12.50 for the 35mm finder (better than the Leitz), the 35/2.5 was $59.95 and the 35/1.8 was 89.95 from the big mail order places. What we forget is that the minimum wage was $1 an hour and those of us still in school weren't working a 40 hour week. On the other hand Spiratone would sell you the set of three LTM to M bayonet adapters for $10, or $5 each plus 35 cents shipping.
I remember that big close-out on LTM Nikkor lenses, and finders too! $12.50 for the 35mm finder (better than the Leitz), the 35/2.5 was $59.95 and the 35/1.8 was 89.95 from the big mail order places. What we forget is that the minimum wage was $1 an hour and those of us still in school weren't working a 40 hour week. On the other hand Spiratone would sell you the set of three LTM to M bayonet adapters for $10, or $5 each plus 35 cents shipping.
MCTuomey
Veteran
it's great to meet you, justplainbill. welcome to RFF.
yours is a wonderful user story. thanks for sharing.
yours is a wonderful user story. thanks for sharing.
Steve_F
Well-known
Thanks
Thanks
Wow,
Thanks for all the replies everyone.
I hope I haven't offended anybody with the term 'snob', it was in fact aimed at myself as there are so many good 35mm film RF out there and I fancy a Leica.
I certainly see it as a tool to be used just like my Nikon FM3A.
I too get fed-up with the 'throw-away' society we live in and feel, as pointed out in these threads, that investing in the Leica system (the Nikon DSLR's have to stay for workhorses) is my own way of sticking two fingers (or middle finger in the US) up to the continuing changes we see in almost all aspects of our society.
I love my FM3A but in 3 years will spares be available, same goes for my F5?:bang:
Thanks,
Stephen Fell.
Oh yes, I forgot to explain how all this came about.
Me and a friend were doing that British thing, grumbling/whinging/moaning about things wearing out and spares for both our Nikon's in years to come over a cup of tea and a cigarette. It was pointed out to me the benefits of the Leica service and spares (the glass - well we all know about the quality don't we) so a few weeks later I made the big mistake of walking into Richard Caplan, London.
I had researched various models and the whole ethos of the MP appeals to me.
I tried an MP - wow. When taking an exposure I was waiting for the rest of the 'noise' having fired the shutter and my friend said that was it. Totally smitten. The feel the build.
I'm sure you all know what I'm talking about.
www.stephenfell.net
Thanks
Wow,
Thanks for all the replies everyone.
I hope I haven't offended anybody with the term 'snob', it was in fact aimed at myself as there are so many good 35mm film RF out there and I fancy a Leica.
I certainly see it as a tool to be used just like my Nikon FM3A.
I too get fed-up with the 'throw-away' society we live in and feel, as pointed out in these threads, that investing in the Leica system (the Nikon DSLR's have to stay for workhorses) is my own way of sticking two fingers (or middle finger in the US) up to the continuing changes we see in almost all aspects of our society.
I love my FM3A but in 3 years will spares be available, same goes for my F5?:bang:
Thanks,
Stephen Fell.
Oh yes, I forgot to explain how all this came about.
Me and a friend were doing that British thing, grumbling/whinging/moaning about things wearing out and spares for both our Nikon's in years to come over a cup of tea and a cigarette. It was pointed out to me the benefits of the Leica service and spares (the glass - well we all know about the quality don't we) so a few weeks later I made the big mistake of walking into Richard Caplan, London.
I had researched various models and the whole ethos of the MP appeals to me.
I tried an MP - wow. When taking an exposure I was waiting for the rest of the 'noise' having fired the shutter and my friend said that was it. Totally smitten. The feel the build.
I'm sure you all know what I'm talking about.
www.stephenfell.net
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
>Me and a friend were doing that British thing, grumbling/whinging/moaning about things wearing out and spares for both our Nikon's in years to come<
What other things (not just cameras) than your FM3A do you own that you sit around worrying about not being repairable forever?
As for durability, I know many people who have been using the same Nikons since the 60's or 70's, many without any kind of service. I would expect an FM3A to work for at least the next 50 years if film were to last that long.
What other things (not just cameras) than your FM3A do you own that you sit around worrying about not being repairable forever?
As for durability, I know many people who have been using the same Nikons since the 60's or 70's, many without any kind of service. I would expect an FM3A to work for at least the next 50 years if film were to last that long.
Steve_F
Well-known
Grammar error.
We were talking about new DSLR's and how future proof they were which led onto spares for the FM3A, F5 and his F3HP in years to come.
Steve.
If they were to make my FM3A as quiet as an MP then I might be persuaded to stay.
We were talking about new DSLR's and how future proof they were which led onto spares for the FM3A, F5 and his F3HP in years to come.
Steve.
If they were to make my FM3A as quiet as an MP then I might be persuaded to stay.
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
O.K. If you need silent cameras, that's a different issue than durability.
Prosaic
Well-known
hans voralberg
Veteran
Strange that 3 out of 5 Leica I own I picked them up from China, Vietnam and a village in Wales, and they work surprisingly well and accurate I don't mean to contradict you or anything, just goes to show that you can't blame Leica being unreliable because you can't find one. And aligning rangefinder is pretty easy with a screwdriver (only true for M3 to M4)
I don't mean to contradict you or anything, just goes to show that you can't blame Leica being unreliable because you can't find one. And aligning rangefinder is pretty easy with a screwdriver (only true for M3 to M4)
Last edited:
R
ruben
Guest
I do not know for what a one time in a life accident the adjective "snob" jumped in alongside the name "Leica".
But I do think you are thinking right towards the future, provided your budget goes with the land.
Of course there is no need to exagerate and draw apocalyptic scenarios in which Leica will be the only repair service around. But ceirtainly the prices are a sort of guarantee that it will remain a profitable business.
Besides, there is nothing wrong in being a snob, within proper limits. I am a snob too, at much less of a budget. So what ?
Cheers,
Ruben
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Like you, Al, JustPlainBill been around so he writes from experience. Your comment, "big mail order places," took me back a bunch of years to long before the internet days, when I learned the craft out of Ansel Adam's books as well as from Photo Techniques, and Camera & Darkroom.
My first parttime gig out of high school -- when I could get it -- was washing cars for $1.50 an hour. That is alot of cars man. Adding insult to injury, I got drafted into the U.S. Army to spend a tropical vacation in Vietnam.
Later, people would remind me the G.I. Bill paid for much of my college education. I earned it man, every dime of it. Seesh.
Last edited:
Rui Morais de Sousa
Established
Am I becoming a Leica 'snob'?
Hello everybody.
I will restrict myself to 35mm and digital (a kind of 35mm for me...). In 1974 I bought my first Minolta 303b and started adding lenses and other bodies (101b, XD-7) to my outfit. The ice on the cake was a XM, in my opinion the last really good Minolta model (stupidly I also sold it...). I was doing fine with that equipment, the resulting negatives and transparencies were of good quality. But the electronic ones were not very reliable, so I started getting bored with misfunctioning cameras. Nikon and Canon were not that different to make me want to change everything. Until one day I decided to pick up a Leica M in a shop, and that changed the photography world for me! I quickly started selling the Minoltas and buying M's and Leitz lenses (from 3.4/21mm to 280mm Telyt). I never regreted that decision, and I even find it crucial for my development as a photographer (I tried to start a thread about "rangefinder language", but saddly, almost nobody showed interest, what somehow amazed me a bit in relation to the veterans I see around here. Might sound silly, but I think that the Leica helped me find a certain kind of photographic language. Large format did it again some years later...But that are other stories...). Besides my Leicas, as the years went by, I also bought Nikon cameras. Still have a nice F from 68 and an FM, with a couple of fine lenses, the most outstanding beeing the 2,5/105mm. But I always found the quality of Nikon very inconsistent: I found myself getting rid of some Nikon lenses, and a F3+motor was traded for a Kostiner printwasher... Then I also bought an used Rolleiflex 2000F because of the film backs interchangeability and, mainly, because of Carl Zeiss optics. Nice lenses and concept, but really not reliable body. Is actually "kaputt" at the moment. Keep on using a SL 35, wich is in fact a better camera then it looks like: is very simple and has a very good finder.
When I was doing a lot of magazine work (not daily press, I never did that kind, so I didn't need very "fast" cameras), mostly photographing people, I got tired of bringing the Hasselblad and decided to modernize and go auto-focus: I switched to Canon (I also considered Leica R and Contax RTS, but quickly gave up for different reasons). That's Canon that brought me through the gate of digital too, but nothing fancy, just a 30D (I found it outraging that my "cheesy" 30D costed almost as much as my EOS 1n top of the line a couple of years ago...we should also stop and think about that!).
Why am I talking all this jive? I just described thirty years of experience, and in that thirty years things came and went, equipments changed, film went digital, etc, etc. But one thing remained: my unquestionable love for Leica! The times are getting tough and tougher, the future is getting dark and darker around here, but one thing I know: if I have to start selling my gear, I will do everything to save my Leicas to the end. They are the cameras I would choose to bring to that proverbial island.
Am I a Leica snob? No way, I hate Leica snobbery!
Rui
Hello everybody.
I will restrict myself to 35mm and digital (a kind of 35mm for me...). In 1974 I bought my first Minolta 303b and started adding lenses and other bodies (101b, XD-7) to my outfit. The ice on the cake was a XM, in my opinion the last really good Minolta model (stupidly I also sold it...). I was doing fine with that equipment, the resulting negatives and transparencies were of good quality. But the electronic ones were not very reliable, so I started getting bored with misfunctioning cameras. Nikon and Canon were not that different to make me want to change everything. Until one day I decided to pick up a Leica M in a shop, and that changed the photography world for me! I quickly started selling the Minoltas and buying M's and Leitz lenses (from 3.4/21mm to 280mm Telyt). I never regreted that decision, and I even find it crucial for my development as a photographer (I tried to start a thread about "rangefinder language", but saddly, almost nobody showed interest, what somehow amazed me a bit in relation to the veterans I see around here. Might sound silly, but I think that the Leica helped me find a certain kind of photographic language. Large format did it again some years later...But that are other stories...). Besides my Leicas, as the years went by, I also bought Nikon cameras. Still have a nice F from 68 and an FM, with a couple of fine lenses, the most outstanding beeing the 2,5/105mm. But I always found the quality of Nikon very inconsistent: I found myself getting rid of some Nikon lenses, and a F3+motor was traded for a Kostiner printwasher... Then I also bought an used Rolleiflex 2000F because of the film backs interchangeability and, mainly, because of Carl Zeiss optics. Nice lenses and concept, but really not reliable body. Is actually "kaputt" at the moment. Keep on using a SL 35, wich is in fact a better camera then it looks like: is very simple and has a very good finder.
When I was doing a lot of magazine work (not daily press, I never did that kind, so I didn't need very "fast" cameras), mostly photographing people, I got tired of bringing the Hasselblad and decided to modernize and go auto-focus: I switched to Canon (I also considered Leica R and Contax RTS, but quickly gave up for different reasons). That's Canon that brought me through the gate of digital too, but nothing fancy, just a 30D (I found it outraging that my "cheesy" 30D costed almost as much as my EOS 1n top of the line a couple of years ago...we should also stop and think about that!).
Why am I talking all this jive? I just described thirty years of experience, and in that thirty years things came and went, equipments changed, film went digital, etc, etc. But one thing remained: my unquestionable love for Leica! The times are getting tough and tougher, the future is getting dark and darker around here, but one thing I know: if I have to start selling my gear, I will do everything to save my Leicas to the end. They are the cameras I would choose to bring to that proverbial island.
Am I a Leica snob? No way, I hate Leica snobbery!
Rui
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I know a lot of snobs who don't actually own a Leica and wouldn't know one if they tripped over it!
If you're a snob you're a snob ... and you'll be a snob no matter what you own or who you are!
If you're a snob you're a snob ... and you'll be a snob no matter what you own or who you are!