dave lackey
Veteran
For someone like me who bleeds red dots, you have a very nice kit in that FM3A and lenses. I would love the same kit myself!:angel:
Now post some pictures from it!!!
anjoca76
Well-known
I shouldn't be, but I am surprised this thread is still alive. To me, someone who owns both Leica and non-Leica gear, you can spend a ton of money on almost any system. It all depends on your cup of tea. I have three Leicas and a handful of lenses, and in total none of them cost more than a Mamiya 7 or Hasselbad or any number of other cameras. You can buy a Barnack with a Elmar 50/3.5 for, give or take, $500. Sure, you can also buy a $3000 lens and a rare, black chrome M4 that will set you back another $2000. But that's the buyer's choice. That's not representative of Leicas overall. If you are comparing a Leica body and lens to a, say, Yashica GSN, ok fine, you win. But there are plenty of other lesser rangefinders that sell for way too high and aren't close to the quality of a good Leica.
I don't justify my Leica purchases. I like them, life is short, I'm not bankrupting my family, and oh, did I mention life is short?
I don't justify my Leica purchases. I like them, life is short, I'm not bankrupting my family, and oh, did I mention life is short?
mnutzer
no title
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
For reasons largely inexplicable, these old threads reincarnate like Buddhists.
A fast check revealed the OP last checked this site going on three years ago.
I wonder does he still have his Leica and that Summicron?
If I were him, I would. Mine is a mid-1950s collapsible Summicron I was gifted and then spent almost as much on it as it would have cost me to buy one in reasonable condition, to have it dehazed and serviced.
I did it because I wanted to, I could afford it, and I intended to use it. Which I have. With super good results. So win-win for me, and I'm happy.
Someone I know now wants me to buy a Summarit 50 1.5 at what I consider a giveaway price. It's in much better condition than my Summicron was, but it too needs a good basic servicing. So yet another conundrum for me.
Alas also, my beloved Leica iif is no showing imminent signs of intending to break down. from age-related problems. So yet more dosh to be spent on having it serviced ad brought back to good everyday use. I wish I had done this when I got the camera, when Leica repair prices were considerably lower (in Australia) than they are now, but I didn't, and I now have to live with this. And spend accordingly.
Will I or won't I? No cigar to be won for divining the answer to all these dilemmas. Summed up in four words, of course I will.
As I've found in the course of my long life, there is a vast difference between justifying anything to myself, and doing the same to the rest of the world. I can usually do the former, but nowadays almost never bother with the latter.
Otherwise, many interesting comments here. Maybe that is why these threads suddenly reincarnate. Good one!!
A fast check revealed the OP last checked this site going on three years ago.
I wonder does he still have his Leica and that Summicron?
If I were him, I would. Mine is a mid-1950s collapsible Summicron I was gifted and then spent almost as much on it as it would have cost me to buy one in reasonable condition, to have it dehazed and serviced.
I did it because I wanted to, I could afford it, and I intended to use it. Which I have. With super good results. So win-win for me, and I'm happy.
Someone I know now wants me to buy a Summarit 50 1.5 at what I consider a giveaway price. It's in much better condition than my Summicron was, but it too needs a good basic servicing. So yet another conundrum for me.
Alas also, my beloved Leica iif is no showing imminent signs of intending to break down. from age-related problems. So yet more dosh to be spent on having it serviced ad brought back to good everyday use. I wish I had done this when I got the camera, when Leica repair prices were considerably lower (in Australia) than they are now, but I didn't, and I now have to live with this. And spend accordingly.
Will I or won't I? No cigar to be won for divining the answer to all these dilemmas. Summed up in four words, of course I will.
As I've found in the course of my long life, there is a vast difference between justifying anything to myself, and doing the same to the rest of the world. I can usually do the former, but nowadays almost never bother with the latter.
Otherwise, many interesting comments here. Maybe that is why these threads suddenly reincarnate. Good one!!
Last edited:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I responded way back at the beginning of this thread, but my answer still stands. Except that the M9 is no longer the single most expensive equipment purchase I have made ... that 'honor' now rests on the Hasselblad 907x/CFVII 50c "Moon" edition plus two lenses.
Makes no difference. It's all just stuff in the camera cabinet to use.
G
Makes no difference. It's all just stuff in the camera cabinet to use.
G
Harry the K
Well-known
No justification, but reality:
Leica M stuff is a big investment, but with the constantly rising prices, there´s no money lost but gained.
Leica M stuff is a big investment, but with the constantly rising prices, there´s no money lost but gained.
Richard G
Veteran
There is no justification for any non-essential purchase in some ways of looking at the world. I traded my M4-2 for an M6 when my children were small. And my M2 was not set up for a 35 which I finally needed in addition to the 50 for these fast children. And the M6 meter is terrific. I have the photographs, manually focussed in the early and late 90s when I maintain that was the best system for grabbing shots of children. Then the M9 in 2012, my main camera still, 13 years later. If I was to justify it monetarily, I have saved quite a bit on film, which admittedly I still shoot, but a lot less.
The M9 stopped me going Fuji X-Pro, which at the time had only two lenses in the range. That didn't fool me. There'd be more. And a second body etc. And would I have stayed with that system? Instead, all my Lecia and ZM lenses were in play for a digital camera which was second nature to me. I improved greatly in my photography and understanding and was invited to join a fantastic group which would not have happened possibly without the M9. So I'd say the pleasure, enjoyment, enrichment, photographs etc was worth every dollar I've ever spent on photography.
The M9 stopped me going Fuji X-Pro, which at the time had only two lenses in the range. That didn't fool me. There'd be more. And a second body etc. And would I have stayed with that system? Instead, all my Lecia and ZM lenses were in play for a digital camera which was second nature to me. I improved greatly in my photography and understanding and was invited to join a fantastic group which would not have happened possibly without the M9. So I'd say the pleasure, enjoyment, enrichment, photographs etc was worth every dollar I've ever spent on photography.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
Right on! Don't you just love being a crotchety old geezer? I sure do.
1936ContaxII
Member
I won't have to justify the Leica prices for myself, I don't pay them.
Except for my Leicaflex SL and two Lenses 50 mm and 135 mm. Solid quality. Normal good prices.
Except for my Leicaflex SL and two Lenses 50 mm and 135 mm. Solid quality. Normal good prices.
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
Justify them or not, it's common-sensible to remember there are German Leicas and the other Leicas.
A made in Germany (or other places in Europe, or even Canada) Leica is, to me, a work of mechanical art.
One made in countries where cheap labor is employed, even with so-called European standards of quality control, is to me second best, even if it works almost as good as the home brand. It also works to the detriment of employing locals from our own country (countries), in the name of globalisation (or more to the point, greater profits). Which I heartily disapprove of.
Not officially publicised but nonetheless well known, are the messes such manufacturers as Fuji and Nikon got themselves into when they 'offshored' their camera production to certain countries in Asia.
Call me a snob. But I know where my Leica money would go, if I had any serious money to spare. For now my 1950s made in Germany iif and my small collection of 'heritage' Leitz lenses, serves me just fine. I love this camera and I credit it with having maintained my interest in film photography in our digital-everything age. So for me, win-win.
Later this week I'll go out with some of my spare dosh in my pocket to bargain for the Summarit 50 1.5 LTM I've had my eye on. It's in need of a good cleaning and a new home. Like an old cat found on the street.
A made in Germany (or other places in Europe, or even Canada) Leica is, to me, a work of mechanical art.
One made in countries where cheap labor is employed, even with so-called European standards of quality control, is to me second best, even if it works almost as good as the home brand. It also works to the detriment of employing locals from our own country (countries), in the name of globalisation (or more to the point, greater profits). Which I heartily disapprove of.
Not officially publicised but nonetheless well known, are the messes such manufacturers as Fuji and Nikon got themselves into when they 'offshored' their camera production to certain countries in Asia.
Call me a snob. But I know where my Leica money would go, if I had any serious money to spare. For now my 1950s made in Germany iif and my small collection of 'heritage' Leitz lenses, serves me just fine. I love this camera and I credit it with having maintained my interest in film photography in our digital-everything age. So for me, win-win.
Later this week I'll go out with some of my spare dosh in my pocket to bargain for the Summarit 50 1.5 LTM I've had my eye on. It's in need of a good cleaning and a new home. Like an old cat found on the street.
Last edited:
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
I don’t have any interest in new Leica offerings so there’s no temptation or justification for me. Not knocking the digital stuff or newer lens designs - but they just don’t interest me - especially at current price-points.
My last *new* Leica camera and lens acquisition was back in 1985 (M6) and a v.4 35 Summicron. We had a small local department store chain back then (Lechmere Sales) and they carried Leica in the camera department. I bought a new 90 thin Tele-Elmar for about $300 or so and that was my last major photographic purchase from Leica. I may have bought a few new accessories afterwards but I’m not counting those.
I did buy some Leica binoculars after that as gifts to myself for completing several degrees in night school: a 10x25 BCA (awesome for concerts) and 8x42 Trinovid. Lovely glass and quality.
Since then, I retrograded and bought several IIIfs and 50’s - a Summicron and Summitar plus miscellaneous accessories to go along with those outfits.
Like others, I really love the jewel-like feeling of the older Barnacks and experiencing the exquisite craftsmanship.
My last *new* Leica camera and lens acquisition was back in 1985 (M6) and a v.4 35 Summicron. We had a small local department store chain back then (Lechmere Sales) and they carried Leica in the camera department. I bought a new 90 thin Tele-Elmar for about $300 or so and that was my last major photographic purchase from Leica. I may have bought a few new accessories afterwards but I’m not counting those.
I did buy some Leica binoculars after that as gifts to myself for completing several degrees in night school: a 10x25 BCA (awesome for concerts) and 8x42 Trinovid. Lovely glass and quality.
Since then, I retrograded and bought several IIIfs and 50’s - a Summicron and Summitar plus miscellaneous accessories to go along with those outfits.
Like others, I really love the jewel-like feeling of the older Barnacks and experiencing the exquisite craftsmanship.
Last edited:
cboy
Well-known
2c on a reincarnated post... I can't as no offering has pique my interest enough to let go of that amount disposal income that would be better used for <enter excuse>
10% extra quality / experience that can't be discerned by the audience for 3x - 10x price of an equivalent item is getting ridiculous imo.
But horses for courses. You either can or can't, but I don't knock those who have done so because it keeps Leica alive. And I understand the need to scratch the itch that everyone goes through and as I have fortunately entered at lower price point many years ago. I hope those entering now they put it to good use. Goodluck to them
10% extra quality / experience that can't be discerned by the audience for 3x - 10x price of an equivalent item is getting ridiculous imo.
But horses for courses. You either can or can't, but I don't knock those who have done so because it keeps Leica alive. And I understand the need to scratch the itch that everyone goes through and as I have fortunately entered at lower price point many years ago. I hope those entering now they put it to good use. Goodluck to them
Last edited:
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
It can be argued either way and comes down to personal taste. The upside is that after initial depreciation the used cameras are stable in price. Some even rise. You can usually count on getting about what you paid for a used Leica when you sell it. If you do lose some money it comes out to a pretty low rental. It is just the up front cost. I have been happy with mine. And I have been happy with other cameras. But it is usually the Leica I reach for.
weizenkeim
On the search
They still offer fully mechanic cameras and optical rangefinders.
A couple of years ago they repaired my 80 yrs old Leica IIIb.
They manufacture in a high salary country.
This all actually costs money.
There just is no mass market for these products. Making it a luxury item seem to be the only way to survive but one have to admit that Leica always stayed true to photography.
A couple of years ago they repaired my 80 yrs old Leica IIIb.
They manufacture in a high salary country.
This all actually costs money.
There just is no mass market for these products. Making it a luxury item seem to be the only way to survive but one have to admit that Leica always stayed true to photography.
Ororaro
Well-known
This is a classic display of the most classical relationship with money,: the more you have, the more you spend. The less you have, the less you spend.
In this light, if tomorrow you suddenly gain some money what will happen is you’ll suddenly add another summilux to your bag.
if, adversely, you lose some money and do not foresee recuperating it, you will sell the summilux you have.
This is called elasticity of spending, and the theory behind luxury goods (luxury as in superfluous).
… wait til you have enough money and you start buying two of the same lenses without clinching…
In this light, if tomorrow you suddenly gain some money what will happen is you’ll suddenly add another summilux to your bag.
if, adversely, you lose some money and do not foresee recuperating it, you will sell the summilux you have.
This is called elasticity of spending, and the theory behind luxury goods (luxury as in superfluous).
… wait til you have enough money and you start buying two of the same lenses without clinching…
Last edited:
JeffS7444
Well-known
At the moment, I don't justify those sorts of prices, and if I were still shooting with Leica M, I wouldn't ignore the whopping discounts for Leica gear including 50/0.95 Noctilux, 50/2 Apo-Summicron, and to a lesser extent, 35/2 Apo-Summicron (it's newer) when comparing new vs secondhand. And for more classical designs, I might want to sample the Lens Light Lab offerings, as they sell without the collector's premium.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
There are Chinese "remakes", "replicas", or "retros" of Leica lenses. Some are quite good. The LLL Elcan, Thypoch Eureka and Thypoch Simera 50mm f/1.4 come to mind. They review quite well and images I have seen are good. Remember that Leica is not the ultimate. Nikon bested them in the early 50's. And now the Chinese lens makers are fielding marvelous lenses at very attractive prices. There are choices, good viable choices, besides Leica.
As for RF bodies to compete with Leica, Pixii still struggles on. It is currently offered as APS-C or full frame. It can make good images with good color and IQ. A strength and weakness is the electronic shutter. It works well below the Hz refresh rate for electricity but above 1/60 here in the US you get banding under LED's.
So there are choices for those who can try new ways.
Last edited:
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Another country heard from. ;o)
JohnGellings
Well-known
After many, many years, I no longer have to justify it because now I know it just is not the right camera for me anymore. They are beautiful to look at, feel good in the hands, the results are great and, of course, I could use one if I had to, but I prefer mirrorless and autofocus now.