menos
Veteran
Tim, yes, I have that feel too.
The images, the old Noctilux can produce (not the slim depth of focus ones of hydrants and alike, but the "angel dust look", it does) are by far my most liked ones.
I am not so hot about the focal length of 75mm or the crooked frame lines, but I feel, it will pair nicely with a 35mm, using a M9 and a M8.2 at once.
It might also fix my changed vision, since getting the M9, as my beloved Noctilux is often a bit too wide for my taste.
I will see … I am happy, I could still find a nice deal with these crazy prices nowadays. Something tells me, these times will be over very quickly with the interesting, high priced items moving out of reach for many people (many items already are, being priced @ 200 − 400% of what they sold for just 2 years ago
).I followed your article about the 75mm musings and enjoyed it - trying to bridge the next 8 weeks until I finally pick up my copy from a friend, who will keep it for me until I cross borders ;-)
I maybe should finally pick up that nice M3, I am still missing and have it shipped to him, so he can actually use the lens.
menos
Veteran
@ David
There are still very nice Leica kits around, which sell not for much more than a few years ago.
I met a nice young couple a week ago, who just bought a nice user M6 classic with 35/1.4 CV SC lens.
I didn't ask for the price paid, but I know, these are selling for exactly the same, as when I bought my first M6.
I see the current production items, the expensive exotics and the old never well sold LTM stuff, picking up in price.
If one wants to start with Leica M Today, some nice kits are still available.
M6 + 35/1.2 + 75/2.5 CV for starters sells for the same and would be my no one highly recommended starter.
Many great lenses are still very affordable, to add on.
The thing with Leica glass seems to be (so far consistently), that using Leica still is not expensive, but involves a high initial investment. The value is constantly growing, so long, you treat the stuff well. My three Leica M mount digital bodies are already depreciated and paid for just with the increase in value of some lenses, I was lucky, to find at good prices in time. That is the beauty of using Leica.
With my Nikon stuff in contrast, it looks very, very different. I won't buy any plastic lenses anytime soon anymore ;-)
There are still very nice Leica kits around, which sell not for much more than a few years ago.
I met a nice young couple a week ago, who just bought a nice user M6 classic with 35/1.4 CV SC lens.
I didn't ask for the price paid, but I know, these are selling for exactly the same, as when I bought my first M6.
I see the current production items, the expensive exotics and the old never well sold LTM stuff, picking up in price.
If one wants to start with Leica M Today, some nice kits are still available.
M6 + 35/1.2 + 75/2.5 CV for starters sells for the same and would be my no one highly recommended starter.
Many great lenses are still very affordable, to add on.
The thing with Leica glass seems to be (so far consistently), that using Leica still is not expensive, but involves a high initial investment. The value is constantly growing, so long, you treat the stuff well. My three Leica M mount digital bodies are already depreciated and paid for just with the increase in value of some lenses, I was lucky, to find at good prices in time. That is the beauty of using Leica.
With my Nikon stuff in contrast, it looks very, very different. I won't buy any plastic lenses anytime soon anymore ;-)
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
He was referring to China's historical cycles of strength and weakness. China is a very old country. Not simply an old culture, but an old state. China has existed as a state for about 2500 years. In that time, the country has gone through times of great wealth and power and times of such extreme weakness that it has fallen under foreign rule.
Examples: In the 1200s, China fell under Mongol rule. The Mongol empire was strong, but China was merely a part of that empire, thus weak. The Chinese expelled the mongols and established a new dynasty of native Chinese emperors (the Ming Dynasty). That brought China back to one of its times of wealth and power.
Then, in the 1600s, the country was invaded by the Manchus (from Manchuria, which was not part of China at that time). They overthrew the Ming and the country broke apart and was subject to years of warfare as the Manchus consolidated their rule over China. This was a time of humiliation for China, because they were ruled by foreigners who they had always looked down on as uncultured barbarians. The Manchus adopted China's culture, but imposed some of theirs on the Chinese people. The Manchus presided over a slow decline that culminated in the loss of several areas to Europeans and the Japanese (Hong Kong to Britain, Macau to Portugal, part of Siberia and Mongolia to Russia, Manchuria and Korea to Japan).
Finally the Manchus were overthrown and a republic proclaimed that never really ruled the country. Warlords fought the government and each other and eventually the Communists conquered all of them. Famine and repression killed millions, and China fell to one of its lowest points in history.
In recent years, China has been rising again economically, going back into one of its historical periods of wealth and power. If history is a guide, it will get much richer and more powerful, then fall again. The country will go through a period of weakness and poverty before again rising and falling and rising and...you get the picture. Most countries that suffer the declines that China has suffered in its past are completely destroyed and replaced by new states and often new cultures. The fall of Rome, Byzantuim, the Habsburg Empire, etc. are examples. They're gone, forever. China has fallen hard in the past, but has always endured to rise again.
sanmich
Veteran
Thanks for the detailed story, Chris.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
sanmich
Veteran
No problem, I love history and love talking about it.
Well, I love history myself.
Just started a huge book on the History of France (born there), and Rome is waiting in the line.
I got fed up with my own ignorance
Instantclassic
Hans
The morphology of world history through the lens of a Leica...
j j
Well-known
Or you could attach a digital back, as exists already for a number of mechanical designs. Comparable in size with a polaroid back and fitted by the user in moments. Not cheap, of course, but that can change.
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
Good deals can always be found on individual sellers, who seem to have become rarer on ebay nowadays. Just be patient, and be rational. If one specific version of one specific lens in one specific color made in one specific year is getting too popular, then why not trying something else? Sometimes you can be pleasantly surprised.
dfoo
Well-known
I actually bought a Hasselblad from those guys. The other guy I like in that mall is Mr. Xu who has the shop next door; I bought my M3 from him.
Sadly I'm no longer in Shanghai, although I've been going back for 6-8 weeks for the past couple of years in May. We'll be going back for Chinese new year next year... Thanks for the comments on my work!
dfoo
Well-known
The best deals these days are old 35mm SLRs. My friend just bought a Canon-AE1, 28, 50 and 80-200 zoom with a Tokina flash for $55. He also bought an OM-1 with a 50/1.8 and 200mm lens + extender for $50. Both in great working condition.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Sure. For how many different camera models were you considering this?
Five Nikon reflexes? Ten? Twenty? Canons? Pentaxes? S-series Nikons? Leica Ms? Rollei TLRs? Mamiya C-series?
I have a Polaroid back for my Nikon Fs. It was made by NPC. It was not cheap, but apart from the optical transfer block (Forscher patents), the components were. The same company spents hundreds of thousands on trying to make a digital version of the same thing, and decided it wasn't worth it.
This isn't a question of expensive components getting cheaper. It's a question of VERY MUCH more engineering difficulty than most people begin to understand, and degrees of precision in assembly that were simply never envisioned by the designers of the film cameras that armchair fantasists imagine converting.
Cheers,
R.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
And prominently a question of lack of quantitative demand. No matter how I and three other people want something, that still makes only four buyers.
sanmich
Veteran
Roger
I admit I don't begin to understand, but I wonder why you you are sure that what was possible on a Hassie is not on any other camera.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Because the Hassie was designed to use the same interchangeable film backs to begin with, and because it occupies a much stronger position in the 6x6 market than any 35mm SLR model did in the 35mm market.
In medium format it's easy. Design it once and it will fit on all Hassies, giving you a big chunk of the market. A very minor rework will make it fit on the two or three other cameras occupying the rest of that market (that coincidentally were also designed for interchangeable backs).
In 35mm we're nowhere near that. Very few cameras were designed for interchangeable film backs, none of those are numerically interesting in terms of market share in any meaningful way. There's a fair number of cameras where you can change the back cover for a data back, but that buys you next to nothing in terms of basic things (like room to fit the sensor against the film rails). For most cameras producing a camera-specific back individual model-specific mechanical engineering, which in 35mm each time only opens you a minuscule market segment. So it's basically pointless until someone develops something the size and thickness of a can of film, and that's been tried and failed.
In other words, it may be technically feasible, but it's economically pointless and hence won't be done.
Except maybe by a few extremely skilled amateurs who do it only for their own gratification and use, but we haven't seen those succeed, either.
Last edited:
steveyork
Well-known
The price increase seems sort of counterintuitive given that supply, in a way, has increased with the Voigtlander and ZM line. I have a fairly extensive rangefinder collection (3 bodies and 7 lenses), all Leica, acquired over the years, but if I were getting into rangefinder photography today, no way would I buy Leica when there are such suitable other options around (unless, of course, I wanted a digital rangefinder).
I've been shooting SLRs a lot this year, and have given serious thought to selling some of the rangefinder stuff. But the price keep just going up and up.
I've noted that since KEH boosted their prices on M stuff 6 months or so ago (I get their catalog) their turnover has decreased substantially.
I've been shooting SLRs a lot this year, and have given serious thought to selling some of the rangefinder stuff. But the price keep just going up and up.
I've noted that since KEH boosted their prices on M stuff 6 months or so ago (I get their catalog) their turnover has decreased substantially.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The Voigtländer and Zeiss lines haven't increased the supply of Leicas.
The fact that Leicas have Leica written on them is a major selling proposition.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
sanmich
Veteran
He certainly did explain about the lack of market, but I still don't see the technical problem in making a back adaptable to a 35mm camera.
Let me ask this, and maybe I'll have my answer:
On a Hassie 500 CM with a digital back, how is the capture done?
Does the lens need to be open on B, and the capture is digital, making it usable only in the studio?
If it's the case, well yes, I see the huge problem...
KM-25
Well-known
I went through this at the beginning of the year when I re-tooled my M kit for all black and white work in editorial and about 4 ongoing book projects, frustrating to a professional to say the least.
But it is done now, two bodies, 4 lenses, no digital M ever, happy as can be....the kit for a pro for a lifetime...
But it is done now, two bodies, 4 lenses, no digital M ever, happy as can be....the kit for a pro for a lifetime...