invest in a "better" camera or lenses?

[magicianhisoka]

Heya everybody, joined this community as i have a whole truckload of questions to ask.

Have been a DSLR user for about 2-3 years now. Been loving the convenience of having zoom lenses and adjustable ISO and all the bells and whistles that modern technology has bestowed upon us. However, i think i've known since the beginning that i've always wanted a rangefinder. Invested a small fortune in my gear and i may be planning on making the big shift to rangefinder freedom soon. Hoping to get some advice on what i should do.

Presently, i don't have enough to plop down on a digital M9 to enjoy. So i'm planning on getting in touch with the age old tradition of film. Seems plenty exciting and i'm hoping to get some opinions.

I see myself as primarily being journalistic with my shooting. Preferring to weave in and out of crowds without being noticed. So i'm planning on getting a 35mm and 75mm. However, i'm not sure if i should

1) get a leica MP which my buddies tell me to be the be all and end all of film cameras. some have been adamant that they're willing to use this till they're dying day. However, i'll have to settle on voigtlander nokton lenses.
2) get a bessa (probably the R2A) and drop whatever i have left on summicrons. or maybe a single 35mm summilux.

Any constructive opinions would be helpful! Thanks in advance everybody!

 

[Keith]

The Bessa is a good idea and you'd probably quite like it ... then one day you'll pick up a Leica MP, M2 or whatever and suddenly you won't like the Bessa quite so much any more.

Get a Leica now and skip that stage! 😀


I've just noticed that's your first post ... welcome to RFF. 🙂

 

[keytarjunkie]

Personally, I'd get an M2 or M4 before I got a Bessa. But if it's between a Bessa and an MP, it really depends on how hard you are on your gear. There's nothing wrong with the Bessas except that they aren't a Leica 😉 just not up to that wonderful mechanical standard. Still good cameras though. And yes, I'd rather shoot Summicrons on a Bessa than Voigtlander glass on an MP. But more ideally, I think you should get an M2 or M4. It'll make you think a bit more, I'm still grateful for the things that my M2 taught me!

 

[Roberto V.]

As keytarjunkie said, get an M2 or M4, and get some Voigtlander or Zeiss ZM glass, or Summicrons if you feel comfortable with the price.

 

[maddoc]

Any M4-2/P with 35/2.0 ASPH would be as good as it gets for the "real" Leica experience.

 

[magicianhisoka]

Thanks for warm welcome Keith 🙂

whether or not i get to lay my hands on an M4 or MP also depends on their availability. From what i've been hearing, they aren't too easy to find either. Though i plan on making an excursion to a local dealer soon.

Thanks for all the feedback so far! Always good to hear extra voices!

 

[thegman]

Obviously your head will tell you that the lens takes the photo, the body does not make much difference, and that's true. I think it's also true that most of us can't tell the difference between a shot taken with a Leica or a Voigtlander or Zeiss lens, and if we can, it's more about "character" of the lens, rather than actual being better/sharper.

Personally I'd get the MP, and spend a little less on lenses, does not really make logical sense, but I don't think the whole range finder/film thing makes any logical sense, but it's still great.

 

[tbarker13]

If you were talking digiital, I'd suggest giving equal weight to the lenses and camera.
But since you are talking film, get the lenses you want. You can "skimp" on the camera - getting something like a nice user M2.
The only reason to go with something as expensive as an MP is if you just want to spend a lot of money on a mechanical work of art that won't do anything to improve your photos.

 

[fiatlux]

I'd decide on the lenses first.

Are you set on a 35mm and a 75?

Then, the 75 bit is IMO the easiest:

- the 75 Summilux is huge and expensive, when you can find one (used only);
- the 75 Summicron ASPH is fantastic but still very expensive, again when you can find one (used or new).
- from what I've seen there's not much in terms of IQ between the Summarit and the Voigtlander Heliar 75 2,5. I'd recommend the latter: it is still available as new old stock and quite common on the used market.

Next is the 35mm:
- the latest 35 Summicron ASPH is great and is probably worth the effort if you manage to find a good used copy not too expensive (saw one at 1250€, went quickly).
- a 35mm Summilux ASPH is very expensive
- I'd not recommend a pre-ASPH Summilux, it is basically Summicron design pushed one stop too far. Some like the look but I find it too expensive for what it is and there are compatibility issues with M8/M9.
- The Voigtlander 35mm 2,5 is sweet and tiny, even if corners are not up to summicron standard. The older 35mm 1,7 seems to be a match for pre-asph summicrons, but is limited to a minimum focusing distance of 0,9m. The 35mm 1,2 is unique but big (not huge as 75mm Summilux huge).

So depending on which 35mm you select you know how much is left for the body.

A Leica M4 would be a good option if you can stand a meterless body. Otherwise, start with a Bessa R2 or later model (cheapest), a M5/M6...

Note: only the Bessa R2 and the Leica M6 and later have 75mm framelines, not the M2/3/4/5 nor the Zeiss Ikon ZM.

 

[cosmonaut]

Why no te 28mm? It has a greater DOF and is easier to scale focus. If you are in and out of crowds and are closer to yur subjects I think it would work better than the 35mm

 

[Moriturii]

I wouldn't get a Leica at all to be honest unless you are ready to drop it off for CLA's every now and again. The shutter system on Leica's are ancient, it's a dinosaur. It may or may not have been rock solid 60 years ago but now an electronically controlled vertical traveling metal shutter is 100x better. Not only do you get higher shutter speeds but they are accurate as well. No one can argue against this, it's fact, it's the nature of the Leica shutters.

I suggest a Hexar RF / Zeiss Ikon or similar, that can use an M mount, and get great lenses.

Or do you want to have a Leica MP whose shutter WILL be unreliable after a couple of months use just because of the nature of the shutter.

Also I suggest get Konica lenses. They are just as good as the Leica's (say M-Hexanon 50mm f2 instead of the latest Summicron), it's A THIRD of the price, and it's practically EXACTLY as good. Just look at the MTF charts on photodo, the figures are within natural errors.

Or go with vanity, and spend 10 times as much, whatever. I'm just being brutally honest. C'est la vie.

Leicas do look a lot better though I'll give you that.

 

[fraley]

The M7 has aperture priority auto exposure which I quickly adopted and find very useful. There is nothing wrong with the M7's shutter by the way.

The lens is what takes the picture, so buy Leica lenses if you can. Voigtlander lenses and cameras are a great intro at an affordable price. Nothing wrong with that either. But as Keith says, if you are going to wind up craving a Leica you might as well skip the intermediate stages.

 

[benlees]

From f4 on most modern lenses are quite similar in quality. You pay a lot for extra stops- this might be worth it to you. Might as well start with a Leica body, though an older one will be a better choice. You can spend a mint but you don't have to. Figure out what you really want.

 

[sper]

You know what I recently went through a similar quandry. I had a Canon full frame system and a couple of lenses, but every lens I really wanted was out of my price range by a wide margin. I ended up switching to a Pentax K-5 and I can tell you being able to have more lenses and more accessories for it has made a big difference in my work. I now have those sweet limited primes, which are the kinds of lenses I could never afford for the Canon, and the best APS-C camera on the market.

So my recommendation would be maybe a Leica M6 or a Bessa or Ikon, with Zeiss lenses. Or a Bessa and Leica lenses like you said. Spend comfortably and that will make a big and really positive difference.

Of course the other option would be a Contax G system if you want to autofocus. Those lenses are cheap and fantastic.

 

[rbsinto]

Best advice I can give you is, if you are fortunate enough to have a camera store nearby where you can handle all the bodies you wish to consider, then take the opportunity to play with them all, handle the controls and see which feels best in your hands, has the control layout that you prefer and even just looks the best to you.
In all likelyhood you'll find one that you prefer above the others.
On the advice of a very wise camera salesman I did that over thirty years ago with Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus and Pentax cameras and settled on the one that best met all the critera he suggested. Good luck in your Quest.

 

[Damaso]

I started with a bessa and used it for several years before moving up to an M6TTL. I start with CV glass as well. If you want to dip your toes in go with a bessa. Good camera for the money but realize it won't last more than a couple of years (at least if you use it ruggedly).

The real answer is to try out as many cameras as you can or in lieu of that do as much research online as you can. Best of luck...

 

[retnull]

Also, coming from the DSLR world, lack of metering and AF can be a real shock to your shooting style.

My opinion: Hexar RF and any good 35mm -- then shoot shoot shoot until you understand why the hype is justified. Hexar RF has good metering, good viewfinder, fast loading, good ergonomics -- an excellent first (or last!) rangefinder.

 

[illuminati_02]

planning on making the big shift to rangefinder freedom soon.

M2 and 35 'lux v2

Unobtrusive, small, quick, quiet, solid.... do everything kit that will last a lifetime+.

I love my M7 as well, but I seem to 2nd guess the meter alot more than I would a nice handheld. One reading on the street and you are set with the M2, slight adjustments if necessary.

If you want modernization, go with a Contax G.. I love mine as well, but it isn't like the classic Leica M.

 

[hellomikmik]

another idea - get a used zeiss ikon (it has AE) and put the rest of the money in lenses. some say zeiss 35 is better or on pair with summicron asph.

 

[Robin Harrison]

Hey magicianhisoka. My take:

Body - Be patient, and look out for an M6. All the functionality of the MP for roughly half the price. The MP has the looks and the class, but in comparison the M6 seems more of a workhorse, more honest. The M2 doesn't have the 75 framelines. The M4Ps do, but you still won't have a meter. Bessa's are fine, but don't inspire like an M. My view is that Voigtlander do lenses better than they do bodies.

75mm - Has to be the CV. One of the bargains in the CV world, in my opinion, mostly due to the relative unpopularity focal length. The only other options are the Leicas, but as (I'm presuming) this will be your secondary lens, I'd save the money for the...

35mm - This is the fun bit. You have so many options. All the CVs are good lenses, in their own ways. The 1.4 Nokton should be in your reach. I'd avoid the 1.2 Nokton as your only 35, becuase it really is a beast. If you go for a Leica body then maybe a Leica 35 won't fall into budget, but there are those who are happy to use the bargainous 40mm summicron with 35mm framelines (myself included). And then you've got the two Zeiss 35s (f2, f2.8) and the two main Hexanon 35s (M and UC) that (broadly speaking) fall in between CV and Leica in terms of price and performance.

You've got some fun choices to make!