Leica M for Professional work

NicoM

NicoM

Well-known
Local time
4:58 AM
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
498
View My Gallery
I'm curious to see how many of you make money with your Leica M cameras. Todays market doesn't seem to have too many opportunities for rangefinder shooter. So yeah, I'm just wondering who of you are pros and use a Leica M as your primary camera.
 
Well, depends on what you mean by 'pro'. If it's in the sense of exclusively photography' then I don't qualify but if it's in the sense of 'photography as an essential part of earning my income' (illustrating the magazine articles and books that I write) then my Leicas have been my primary cameras for maybe 30 years. Currently M2, M4-P, M8, M9.

Cheers,

R.
 
I disagree, I think today's market provides great opportunities to use rangefinders. It all depends on what kind of work you primarily do. I know a lot of wedding photographers who use Leicas for example. Fro photojournalists like myself who don't need lots of long glass, rangefinders are a great tool for creating intimate images or for shooting on the street...
Tarragona_Pentacost_467.jpg
 
Damaso said:
I disagree, I think today's market provides great opportunities to use rangefinders. It all depends on what kind of work you primarily do. I know a lot of wedding photographers who use Leicas for example. Fro photojournalists like myself who don't need lots of long glass, rangefinders are a great tool for creating intimate images or for shooting on the street...
Click to expand...

I've heard of wedding photographers using Leica's but those are rare. I don't know anyone personally. Do you make a steady income with the photojournalism work you do with the Leica? I'd love to eventually let go of my Canon 5D2 kit in favor of a digital Leica as it is a much more enjoyable system to shoot with regularly. It's tough when I try to think about what kind of work I can actually do with the Leica over the Canon. I just checked out your website, and it's really encouraging. Thanks for sharing!
 
NicoM said:
It's tough when I try to think about what kind of work I can actually do with the Leica over the Canon.
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with this... perhaps the Leica doesn't fit your work? Many use Leicas as their personal work camera and use something else professionally.
 
NicoM said:
I've heard of wedding photographers using Leica's but those are rare. I don't know anyone personally. Do you make a steady income with the photojournalism work you do with the Leica? I'd love to eventually let go of my Canon 5D2 kit in favor of a digital Leica as it is a much more enjoyable system to shoot with regularly. It's tough when I try to think about what kind of work I can actually do with the Leica over the Canon. I just checked out your website, and it's really encouraging. Thanks for sharing!
Click to expand...


I happen to know two wedding photographers who primarily use Leica Ms but then again I don't know a ton of wedding photographers.

Steady income? Depends on how you define steady. I certainly make a living, primarily through grants, fellowships and exhibitions. As a former breaking news photographer I'd say that I could cover about 80% of what I used to shoot using a Leica. There are some photographers, most notably Angel Franco at the NY Times, who use Leicas quite often if not exclusively. I remember when things went digital he was pretty pissed about switching to Canon but now he shoots Leica again.

You're pretty young so my advice would be to focus less on "how" and more on "what." I don't recommend photography as a way to earn a living, there are better ways to do that. But if you love it and don't mind making less than your peers it's great. Figuring out what you want to photograph, or rather what you are passionate about is the key. I could shoot what I shoot using a SLR, point and shoot or any number of other things. For me a rangefinder is a better fit, especially since I shot with SLRs for the first half of my career. For you it might not be the case. There are pros and cons for every type of camera...

Road_Trip_1069.jpg
 
NicoM said:
I'd love to eventually let go of my Canon 5D2 kit in favor of a digital Leica as it is a much more enjoyable system to shoot with regularly. It's tough when I try to think about what kind of work I can actually do with the Leica over the Canon.
Click to expand...


Perhaps you are looking at the 'problem' backwards?

I would guess most wedding photographers are already doing wedding photography when they decide a Leica M could do a better job for them. They didn't buy a Leica M and then become a wedding photographer. Or a photojournalist finds his work would be better suited to a smaller Leica M rather than a large Canon, and he is already working on stories that back up his judgement on this. To put it another way, a pro knows what equipment he needs to do his job better, he won't often need to ask if one camera or another is 'better', and it will be a business decision.
 
I still shoot some assignments for our weekly newspaper with film Ms. I publish two to four photos a week that are shot with the Leicas. Unfortunately, the Ms are not adequate for sports and the Canon digitals are easier for color work.
 
NicoM said:
I'm just wondering who of you are pros and use a Leica M as your primary camera.
Click to expand...
Ummm. I use different cameras for different applications. I use Leica Ms and Canon dSLRs. Not sure that I'd class either as primary - I probably shoot similar numbers of pix on each per year. Also whilst photography remains my primary source of income, like many other photographers I have rather more diverse income streams than purely that from taking photographs.....
 
i think most would be surprised at how many folks work outside of the 'digital slr press/wire service' model.

assignment work, pre-funded projects, projects supported by awards, fellowships, non-profits, embassies, crowd funded etc. etc. etc. make up a larger portion of the top tier photography you are seeing today and that will grow. none of this market portion, group, circle, whatever is dependent on shooting and dumping in a matter of minutes. therefore, you can shoot whatever the hell you want. the past few projects, and my current project about to start have been on film with rf medium format cameras. i have a friend who won world press awards multiple times in one year, within the past 5 years, who was shooting medium format film for it.

Danny Wilcox Frazier is name to look up to see someone working very traditionally. M's and B+W. Just won a few awards.

There is a mechanism on the internet. A mechanism that pumps out rules and boxes on what is needed or how things are done. Sadly it exists in the schools these days as well. Most of what it is spewing isn't in touch with reality.
 
I'm a commercial photographer and rarely use my M9 for commercial assignments. I use a variety of systems with each being best suited for a particular kind of job. I'm currently shooting product beauty shots for a national client where the images will be reproduced 80" high for point of purchase. I'm using my Hasselblad digital back on a Linhof Technikardan 23 and NIkon 120mm micro (view camera lens) for the capture. For the individual products for POP and catalog I'm using my Nikon D800 with the 85 PC lens.

Architectural work is done with either system depending on reproduction size and the degree of controll needed. Corporate head shots with the Nikon and 85 G using the x1.5 sensor function. I have used the M9 and 90 apo asph summicron for head shots a couple of times but gravitate to the Nikon. Most people / lifestyle type ads that I shoot are generally with the Hasselblad digital or the Nikon depending on what I'm shooting. The Hasselblad makes superior images but is slower and not suitable for fast shooting. The M9 is best for candid work.
 
I work professionally mainly with Canon, but my M8.2 is used for some editorial work, and for work where prints are required. I like the files from the CCD sensor for making prints. But I never lean on the M8.2 very hard. It's a slower operation than the 5DMK2.
 
Damaso said:
I happen to know two wedding photographers who primarily use Leica Ms but then again I don't know a ton of wedding photographers.

Steady income? Depends on how you define steady. I certainly make a living, primarily through grants, fellowships and exhibitions. As a former breaking news photographer I'd say that I could cover about 80% of what I used to shoot using a Leica. There are some photographers, most notably Angel Franco at the NY Times, who use Leicas quite often if not exclusively. I remember when things went digital he was pretty pissed about switching to Canon but now he shoots Leica again.

You're pretty young so my advice would be to focus less on "how" and more on "what." I don't recommend photography as a way to earn a living, there are better ways to do that. But if you love it and don't mind making less than your peers it's great. Figuring out what you want to photograph, or rather what you are passionate about is the key. I could shoot what I shoot using a SLR, point and shoot or any number of other things. For me a rangefinder is a better fit, especially since I shot with SLRs for the first half of my career. For you it might not be the case. There are pros and cons for every type of camera...

Road_Trip_1069.jpg
Click to expand...

Thanks! I'm actually in pursuit of a graphic design degree right now, and I love it. Photography has just always been my passion, and sometime I get the idea that it's what I need to go for. I guess I'll focus on what's ahead of me right now. Thanks for all of the replies guys!
 
V-12 said:
Perhaps you are looking at the 'problem' backwards?

I would guess most wedding photographers are already doing wedding photography when they decide a Leica M could do a better job for them. They didn't buy a Leica M and then become a wedding photographer. Or a photojournalist finds his work would be better suited to a smaller Leica M rather than a large Canon, and he is already working on stories that back up his judgement on this. To put it another way, a pro knows what equipment he needs to do his job better, he won't often need to ask if one camera or another is 'better', and it will be a business decision.
Click to expand...

It really isn't a problem at all. I used to shoot regularly with the 5D, and covered many events and did photo shoots when I was in high school. I've had it for 4 years now, and for the past 2, it hasn't neen getting too much use because of the size. I bought myself an M3 and love how it shoots. It literally goes with me wherever I go. I just wish it was digital.

I'm working on a graphic design degree, which will probably be my primary income once I get out of college. Part of me just wonders if a can do assignments again. Cover events, do shoots and that sort of stuff. My Canon is a very capable camera, and I still get blown away when I see the files that come out of it. I was mainly curious to see if it was a feasible option to own only a digital Leica system if I were ever to do an sort of professional photography work. At this point, it's too expensive of an option to own two full systems. In a perfect world, I'd own two (or more) systems.
 
Back in 1968 when I started shooting professionally there were too many choices that had quality optics and would stand up to hard use. You either used Leica, Nikon RF or Nikon F. I used Leicas 95% of the time and a Nikon F the rest. I even shot football with a M + visiclex II and 200mm Tellyt. Don't want to do that again but it can be done. You have to ask yourself when you're considering a M digital, is this the best tool for my work. I consider more than just how sharp the lenses are. Can I focus effectively and keep pace with my subject or will I lose shots. Is framing precise enough? Is the buffer deep enough or will I be waiting on the camera? Will zooms provide flexibility that missing with an M and primes? Simply will it do what I need a camera to do? I almost always answer the questions, there are better tools for the job. The cases I carry my M out on projects is usually I'm just looking for a change from my other equipment and can make the M work. We made do with what we had in the 60's because we didn't have much of a choice. Today we have a broad selection of incredanle gear that can handle almost anything you throw at it. Given all the choices I would never depend on just my M 9 or any M for that matter. For me the M is reserved for those slower paced special documentary projects that it's just right for.
 
I'm a wedding photographer. The M9 is my primary, but not only camera at each wedding. During the ceremony and while shooting guests at the reception I'll switch to an autofocus system. I shot Canon for 20 years before the M9. It's a different way of working (not better and not worse, just different)and probably unsuitable for most. However it works particularly well for me.

Gordon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom