Age to get a Leica?

M

MarkoKovacevic

Well-known
Local time
6:33 PM
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
512
I'm 16 currently, and I'm thinking of saving for a Leica M. Either M6 or M3.
Is this age, or this stage in my photographic career too early for a Leica?

What are your thoughts on this?
 
No. Not too early. Can't be too early. A Leica won't impede your photographic growth in any way. Save for it, buy it and appreciate it.
 
Here's a good lesson to learn at age 16 and apply here: ask for forgiveness, not permission. There are no guarantees in life, so save for it, get it, learn with it, enjoy it.
 
david.elliott said:
I will turn the question around --

Why do you think it might be too early?
Click to expand...

I feel that its too early because I'm not good enough currently to shoot a Leica, and I haven't made a name for myself yet in photography.

RE: What would you be shooting in the meantime, I'm shooting a combo of Olympus XA and a Nikon.
 
MarkoKovacevic said:
I feel that its too early because I'm not good enough currently to shoot a Leica, and I haven't made a name for myself yet in photography.

RE: What would you be shooting in the meantime, I'm shooting a combo of Olympus XA and a Nikon.
Click to expand...



Being good enough or not to use a Leica has no relevance ... it's a matter of deciding whether or not you want to spend that much money on a rangefinder yet when you may change directions later regarding your equipment choices.

I think they're a beautiful camera but assuming you may need to possess a certain set of credentials to own one is perpetuating the crazy myth about them that exists in a lot of people's minds.
 
I'm pretty sure I want a rangefinder... I prefer using the XA over the Nikon, and really the only time I needed the nikons speed and auto exposure was shooting skateboarding, and band photos with a flash. I also prefer the size and VF over a SLR.

About the credentials, I just feel that, in order to use such a great camera, you must be very good as well.

Added: And yes, I would be paying for it myself. First lens would probably be a J-8 with an adapter.
 
When I was your age, I decided to get a new camera. I got a Mamiya 645 and a set of lenses for it instead of a Leica, because I wanted medium format. It is more suited to the work I was doing then, and I still use the camera often. The 645 is a pro camera and was very expensive new. I didn't worry that I was 'qualified' for it. The only qualification to own any camera is having the money to buy it. Once you do that it is up to you to make good use of it.
 
As long as you can afford it, then the earlier the better. Good eyesight is one of the key factors in the enjoyment of photography, especially rangefinders.
 
Well, I am 24, and I had got m4, m6 ttl and IIIc.

I would suggest it to get it asap, either a m6 or ttl, as you need a spare meter with the M3, which will slow down your shooting unless you had mastered meterless shooting. Or a Bessa R(2,3,4, etc), which will be cheaper. Part of the Leica magic lies with the lens as well, so would suggest to save for a good secondhand Leica 35mm or 50mm to start with.

I started with Nikon DSLR, then Nikon Film SLR, got a Olympus XA, followed by M4 and M6, I did miss Aperture priority in FE2 sometimes.
 
Last edited:
MarkoKovacevic said:
I feel that its too early because I'm not good enough currently to shoot a Leica, and I haven't made a name for myself yet in photography.

RE: What would you be shooting in the meantime, I'm shooting a combo of Olympus XA and a Nikon.
Click to expand...

You may never be "good enough", if that is your criteria. There are only two real questions here, from your point of view. Do I want a Leica?, and Can I afford one?

If you answer both questions yes, go for it and don't worry what any of us on the site say.

For the record, I have a CL which I bought when I was 45. At your age, I was using either my Instamatic 104 or my father's Argus C3.

Good luck!
 
hunghang said:
As long as you can afford it, then the earlier the better. Good eyesight is one of the key factors in the enjoyment of photography, especially rangefinders.
Click to expand...


I find the opposite Hung ... the worse my eyesight gets with age the more I miss the SLR shots struggling to focus while a rangefinder system seldom lets me down.

I guess the next stage will be AF! :p
 
I say get it if you're sure you'll use it. My 16y/o daughter has a film camera she uses for her school photography class. She has learned a lot and processes her own B&W film. Hopefully she will continue with photography as a hobby after the class is completed.

Of course, even if you lay off for awhile the Leica will be there waiting.
 
Keith said:
I find the opposite Hung ... the worse my eyesight gets with age the more I miss the SLR shots struggling to focus while a rangefinder system seldom lets me down.

I guess the next stage will be AF! :p
Click to expand...

AF, then use hyperfocal distance for everything, then pinhole :)
 
The bug hit me at 18 too, but I couldn't find a Leica within my price range (this was 1961) so I bought a Canon, very similar to the Leicas of the day and it took Leica lenses. By the time I was twenty I had two Leicas, a III-c and a III-f, and four lenses.

If you change your mind in a year or so you can get most of your money back when you sell, and perhaps even more. Buy a new DSLR for the same money and see what it's worth in a year...or even next month. In my near half century of experience the economics work in Leica's favor. Long term, Leicas are free.
 
I didn't get a leica until I was 60 years old, three years ago, but at the time I felt like a kid on Christmas morning. Go for it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom