An expensive decision

[Ko.Fe.]

There are only three reasons to buy a digital Leica: 1) you prefer a rangefinder camera and Leica is the only game in town; 2) you have a significant investment in Leica lenses (a subset of 1); or 3) you want to buy a status symbol. The people who comprise 1) and 2) are a small niche of photographers in general. The people who comprise 3) are a large segment of people with more money than sense. Group 3) makes Leica possible for groups 1) and 2). God bless them.

My wife asked recently - why you didn't get Canonikon as your BD present?
And my mother who gave money for this camera as BD present asked - is here any not just another Canonikon camera, but something more solid?

I walked with my daughter and this camera on fairground this weekend.
Person in cotton candy booth stopped me and asked if it is M4. I told it is digital and showed Canada made lens on it. He told me to comeback later for free cotton candy.

And then I walked with it aftter getting it back with new sensor in Toronto....
Retired gentlemen who was walking with his wife looked at it and "nice camera".

4) it connects you with people, Canonikon and Fusonic aren't...

 

[oftheherd]

My views on Leica cameras have evolved over the years, but I think the beauty of the M-system is that it imposes a certain discipline upon the user:

System limitations: The 0.72x finder is really most comfortable with 35 and 50mm lenses IMO. Others, less so. And it doesn't accommodate zoom lenses at all. So the range of distractions is pretty limited unless one is seeking another 35 or 50mm lens.


Cost: I don't know about others, but the cost of the lenses and bodies meant that I built up my system slowly and carefully and tended to know each bit of equipment well.


Attitude: Feeling incredibly fortunate just to have a Leica M outfit is everything! Less likely to blame shortcomings on the hardware and more likely to look at improving one's craft.


But having said that, I got to wondering whether the same thoughtful, pared-back approach might not work just as well with other makes of equipment. And so far, the results have been

Sorry. I Don't mean to pick on you because others have said it before. But no camera system or parts thereof impose discipline on me. I impose discipline on me or I don't have any.

 

[Calzone]

There are only three reasons to buy a digital Leica: 1) you prefer a rangefinder camera and Leica is the only game in town; 2) you have a significant investment in Leica lenses (a subset of 1); or 3) you want to buy a status symbol. The people who comprise 1) and 2) are a small niche of photographers in general. The people who comprise 3) are a large segment of people with more money than sense. Group 3) makes Leica possible for groups 1) and 2). God bless them.

PTP,

My Monochrom hits all three. I don't need or want an upgrade as far as a digital rangefinder.

I will also say that if you are a Leica owner you get accused of being a rich dentist instead of a photographer by people that have Leica envy. Also don't forget that a Leica owner is always vulnerable to personal attacks and predudice, so I don't think so much of the status symbol. Owning and using Leica is a liability in real life.

I still love my MM and most of the time a 28 Cron is mounted. February last year it had gotten overhauled when it got a new sensor. Should be good for another 5 years without any problems (discounting the free sensor replacement and overhaul).

In my case The SL was the better camera because of non Leica glass. The Noct-Nikkor on the SL using a Noctilux F1.2 profile is a mighty nice manual focus rig. Who else has an legendary 87/1.2.

Buying a 75 Cron for my SL is about $4750.00. Buying a CL was cheaper and I get F1.4.

Cal

 

[oftheherd]

Interesting question Bill. Not being a digital nor Leica man, I don't think I can provide any useful answers. But what really intrigues me is the majority of posts not caring for Leica, or at least Leica digital. It hasn't been that long ago that most people here on RFF thought photographic Nirvana had been reached by Leica, and everyone should be taking that path and they could also immediately be accepted into Nirvana.

Really an interesting change. It seems Leica is or is about to be in deep kimchee.

 

[Calzone]

Interesting question Bill. Not being a digital nor Leica man, I don't think I can provide any useful answers. But what really intrigues me is the majority of posts not caring for Leica, or at least Leica digital. It hasn't been that long ago that most people here on RFF thought photographic Nirvana had been reached by Leica, and everyone should be taking that path and they could also immediately be accepted into Nirvana.

Really an interesting change. It seems Leica is or is about to be in deep kimchee.

OTH,

I think there is a polarizing effect going on here.

I do too many different things to be called a "Leica fanboy," yet by a few that like to name call I have been called a Leica fanboy because after respectfully hearing their side of the coin I can justify my thinking for doing what is right for me, and when I do I speak for myself only.

Meanwhile theses jokers are trying to brainwash me, change my thinking, and impose their thinking upon me.

So I get why some people who perhaps cannot defend themselves from such attacks who are Leica owners just duck for cover, or perhaps they too are tired of also being accused of being "posers," "rich dentists," or some other derogatory name calling like "Leica fanboy."

Like I said above in another post owning and shooting a Leica is a liability.

Personally I like Leica designs. The complaints about reliability I have none. I understand that my Monochrom will lock up if I use it in continuous, but once I learned that if you don't use continuous mode on the power switch the camera then never locks up again. Oh-well. Not a deal breaker for me.

The SL might not have the fastest autofocus, but it really nails the focus, and that's what is important to me. The 50 Lux-SL truely has a wonderful wide open rendering, but no one ever says anything positive for fear of getting egged. LOL

The Monochrom warts and all, even thought the M-246 is a more advanced camera in almost every way. The primitive nature of the MM makes it most like a film M out of any rangefinder. So what it is slow like a film camera: that's the point.

As far as saying that Leica's are expensive: no need to remind me because I bought and own three Leica digitals that I bought brand new.

Cal

 

[LCSmith]

OTH,

I think there is a polarizing effect going on here.

I do too many different things to be called a "Leica fanboy," yet by a few that like to name call I have been called a Leica fanboy because after respectfully hearing their side of the coin I can justify my thinking for doing what is right for me, and when I do I speak for myself only.

Meanwhile theses jokers are trying to brainwash me, change my thinking, and impose their thinking upon me.

So I get why some people who perhaps cannot defend themselves from such attacks who are Leica owners just duck for cover, or perhaps they too are tired of also being accused of being "posers," "rich dentists," or some other derogatory name calling like "Leica fanboy."

Like I said above in another post owning and shooting a Leica is a liability.

Personally I like Leica designs. The complaints about reliability I have none. I understand that my Monochrom will lock up if I use it in continuous, but once I learned that if you don't use continuous mode on the power switch the camera then never locks up again. Oh-well. Not a deal breaker for me.

The SL might not have the fastest autofocus, but it really nails the focus, and that's what is important to me. The 50 Lux-SL truely has a wonderful wide open rendering, but no one ever says anything positive for fear of getting egged. LOL

The Monochrom warts and all, even thought the M-246 is a more advanced camera in almost every way. The primitive nature of the MM makes it most like a film M out of any rangefinder. So what it is slow like a film camera: that's the point.

As far as saying that Leica's are expensive: no need to remind me because I bought and own three Leica digitals that I bought brand new.

Cal

By the same token, Cal, for the sake of intellectual honesty you must concede that others like myself may propose legitimate reasons for disliking the digital M. It isn't all envy.

 

[css9450]

4) it connects you with people, Canonikon and Fusonic aren't...

I get comments/questions from passersby if I'm using one of either of two types of cameras: My ancient folders, or my DSLRs. No other cameras in-between get a passing glance. But I don't own an M, so there might be a huge untapped pool of attention I am missing out on.

 

[Emile de Leon]

Leica..the camera..that connects you...with people..now thats a good ad copy..lol..!

 

[ptpdprinter]

I walked with my daughter and this camera on fairground this weekend. Person in cotton candy booth stopped me and asked if it is M4. I told it is digital and showed Canada made lens on it. He told me to comeback later for free cotton candy.

And then I walked with it aftter getting it back with new sensor in Toronto.... Retired gentlemen who was walking with his wife looked at it and "nice camera".

4) it connects you with people, Canonikon and Fusonic aren't...

Okay. I'll grant you your fourth reason: people stop you and ask you about your camera and you get free cotton candy at the fair. Priceless. But I have to ask: doesn't the same thing happen with your FSU cameras which cost a pittance? I'm thinking the answer is "da".

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I get comments/questions from passersby if I'm using one of either of two types of cameras: My ancient folders, or my DSLRs. No other cameras in-between get a passing glance. But I don't own an M, so there might be a huge untapped pool of attention I am missing out on.

I tried them all. My biggest achievement was with DSLR - person run from me and yelled - paparazzi !
Folders, press cameras, TLRs , nothing - people looked at me like on slightly co-co. With film Leicas I get asked, with FED-2 I was told it was nice. One lady dressed in leather wanted my FED case.
But to be completely honest with M4-2 I was recently called as scam on earth, but no f word!
Still, M holds my total record for been stopped and asked. This is how I meet Mansoor from Riyerson university, where he is working as photographer. He just stoped me on Go train and asked.

 

[css9450]

Okay. I'll grant you your fourth reason: people stop you and ask you about your camera and you get free cotton candy at the fair. Doesn't the same thing happen with your FSU cameras which cost a pittance? I'm thinking the answer is "da".

The candy tastes sweeter when he is carrying his Leica.

 

[Calzone]

By the same token, Cal, for the sake of intellectual honesty you must concede that others like myself may propose legitimate reasons for disliking the digital M. It isn't all envy.

L,

But of course. Here at RFF I think there is plenty of space for reason, but I also present in quotes the name calling that also happens here that are disrespectful personal attacks.

I cite this history as a legitimate reason of OTH's observation of the skewed response. Perhaps I'm being bold here for speaking up for those that might have sequestered themselves.

So far I see none of that here. I know the two younger posters who attacked me no longer are active here.

If you get to know me I tend to be fair and one thing I do is I riff "the good, the bad and the ugly." In this specific example I was being attacked because I bought a Leica SL, and these two guys took exception to that and brought up the Sony A7 as a superior camera. Well not universally and in every manner.

For me if you have or can afford Leica glass having access to Leica Profiles is a big deal. Also as stated I was not looking for an advanced camera, Leica most of the time is not so advanced, but my criticism of the Sony controls and layers of menu's received no acknowledgement or response.

Then there was the wide angle issue...

So it came down to insults, name calling, and disrespect that was kinda one sided: Not thoughtful responses. In the end if you read through one of those threads there is a lot to learn about human nature.

My spin is these two young people felt entitled and priced out. Even deeper down if you filter through all the noise you can kinda see they have Leica envey, because of their entitlement they were angry, and they directed that anger my way. Pretty much almost high school like behavior.

I was also called, "smug."

Well perhaps I should be. I grew up poor, I worked hard, and now I'm old and finally I'm enjoying life. Soon hope to retire.

Lot of entertainment value.

Cal

 

[ptpdprinter]

If it is any consolation, I think you fall in group 2 - preexisting investment in Leica lenses. Why you had those lenses in the first place is a different question.

 

[airfrogusmc]

After buying a new M9 it cured me of ever wanting to buy a new Leica product again especially a digital product. Nearly half of the time I owned it lenses and or body we're in for repairs of which none were for a corroded sensor.

I don't know what system you used in film and digital but I started using Leica and Nikon from the beginning of my career fifty years ago. Nikon especially has excellent pro service with NPS and even consumer service as does Canon with CPS. Leica was good because they depended on the pro market to keep them alive. I'm afraid I've become accustomed to a professionally run repair service and unfortunately Leica doesn't have that unless you're a dentist.

The short story is that I had so many problems with my equipment and getting it serviced by Leica I had to threaten a lawsuit before they would replace a defective 90 apo lens. You might feel different but I'm not going to pay that kind of money and take that kind of abuse again. I've got to say that one of the best feelings in my life was getting rid of that equipment.

I will agree on the issues with repairs concerning Leica. Having been a CPS member off and on since the late 1970s Canons CPS repair service was really good.

But I have had far less issues with my Leica Ms than I with my Canons in the same amount of time and accusations and that would include the recall on my MM and M-E.

There are few here that shoot as many frames with their cameras as I do. I am a full time working pro and usually shoot everyday. Usually several thousand frames a week. And Ia pretty hard on my gear.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I shoot with my MM for my personal work because I never get any attention when on the streets. It used to drive me crazy when I would take my Canon DSLRs on the streets. Besides the size and auto focus (useless DoF scales on the lenses) it was big and obtrusive. I would always get asked questions like is that a _____? How do you like it blah blah blah? The MM rarely gets a comment or much less a glance.

I think it matters what you shoot with only in regards to finding what best fits the way you see and work. For me it is Leica M. The M 10 and M 262 take up the work load on my pro work and for no other reason than they fit the way I see and better than any other digital camera's I have used and I have tried different formats and many different brands.

And yes Leica M is expensive but they are about the same as top o the line nikanons now. I am old enough to remember when they were double maybe more than the price of the top o the line nikanons.

For the record I shoot with what best fits the way I work period. I am not rich. I am lucky in regards to my work pays for it all. I did realize a few decades ago if you don't try and own all the stuff you can afford more than you think you can. I drive a Honda Fit and live in an unremarkable condo. I shot with 500 C/Ms as my main cameras for a couple of decades. I feel as good about my digital Ms and I did about my Blads.

The M 10 doesn't have the lock up problems the MM and M-E have from time to time. Having said that I do still like my original MM and like Cal I have no desire to upgrade.

 

[LCSmith]

L,

But of course. Here at RFF I think there is plenty of space for reason, but I also present in quotes the name calling that also happens here that are disrespectful personal attacks.

I cite this history as a legitimate reason of OTH's observation of the skewed response. Perhaps I'm being bold here for speaking up for those that might have sequestered themselves.

So far I see none of that here. I know the two younger posters who attacked me no longer are active here.

If you get to know me I tend to be fair and one thing I do is I riff "the good, the bad and the ugly." In this specific example I was being attacked because I bought a Leica SL, and these two guys took exception to that and brought up the Sony A7 as a superior camera. Well not universally and in every manner.

For me if you have or can afford Leica glass having access to Leica Profiles is a big deal. Also as stated I was not looking for an advanced camera, Leica most of the time is not so advanced, but my criticism of the Sony controls and layers of menu's received no acknowledgement or response.

Then there was the wide angle issue...

So it came down to insults, name calling, and disrespect that was kinda one sided: Not thoughtful responses. In the end if you read through one of those threads there is a lot to learn about human nature.

My spin is these two young people felt entitled and priced out. Even deeper down if you filter through all the noise you can kinda see they have Leica envey, because of their entitlement they were angry, and they directed that anger my way. Pretty much almost high school like behavior.

I was also called, "smug."

Well perhaps I should be. I grew up poor, I worked hard, and now I'm old and finally I'm enjoying life. Soon hope to retire.

Lot of entertainment value.

Cal

Thanks, Cal. That sounds like a sad and pathetic exchange. I'm sorry you had to endure it.

 

[Archiver]

On the comparison with smaller sensor cameras and phones, if you only shoot in good light and use lenses stopped down there is zero value in any full-frame (or larger) sensor. Smaller sensors usually have newer and more capable technology than Leica’s relatively dated FF offering, so unless shallow DOF is your thing you will not see any significant improvement in image quality. My 20MP u4/3 Olympus easily matches the M10 for image quality even with (the admittedly good) pro zooms - it gets a boost from the image stabilisation and intelligent metering that maximise the results possible from the sensor.

If a 20mp m43 camera matches the M10's image quality, then I should push ahead with my desire for a Panasonic G9 or GH5. While the results I can get from an earlier Panasonic like the GH3, GH4 or GM1 are very nice, they lack the quality of the M9. I'd be very surprised if I can get M9 level results with a G9 or GH5. If that's the case, then I'd be able to travel with a G9 and some high quality Olympus or Panasonic primes and leave the M9 at home.



Bill, your question seems to be twofold. 'Is a Leica rangefinder as relevant today' and 'am I justified in spending a large amount of money on a M10?'


'Is a Leica rangefinder relevant today?' Yes, if the rangefinder style of shooting works for what you want. There are many occasions where a manual focus camera doesn't work for me, but many other times when it does.


'Is the M10 worth spending lots and lots of money?' Yes, see above. If you're mostly satisfied with a M9 or M240, then a M10 can only be better. If it doesn't, then it sure won't be worth it. It's a decision that only you can make, based on your photographic needs and past experience.

 

[willie_901]

My views on Leica cameras have evolved over the years, but I think the beauty of the M-system is that it imposes a certain discipline upon the user:

...

I never understood the value-added nature relying on external devices to impose discipline. Achieving self-discipline is a virtue. I think developing self-discipline comes from within.

Except for the being able to compose while viewing outside the finder frame lines, may digital cameras offer an OVF. Some of these are compact and light weight. Only a few are designed to with manual focusing in mind. So developing manual focusing skills as a form of self-discipline I can be difficult compared to a digital M. Otherwise...

Numerous non-Leica film cameras also impose discipline.

There is something to be said for minimalism. Setting up other digital cameras for minimalistic use is not an exercise in minimalism. It's a relatively complex and often inconvenient task. At the same time, once completed one can enjoy a minimalistic experience.

 

[Calzone]

Thanks, Cal. That sounds like a sad and pathetic exchange. I'm sorry you had to endure it.

L,

Thanks for the acknowledgement.

Last year at Photoville I was lucky enough to secure one of the 700 tickets to attend a Pete Souza interview and hear him give the backstory of some of his favorite shots from when he was President Obama's Personal Photographer.

Over the eight years of service he took about 2 million photographs, and used only one sick day and only had one week's vacation. Pretty much he was still exhausted.

At the end of the interview there was a Q&A. One attendee asked why he picked a Canon DSLR. Pete's response was that the Canon had the quieter shutter. It also came out that he carried two rigged cameras, so we all know how physical that can be. Imagine wearing out cameras in a year.

So here is where things get crazy. Imagine Pete's photography being judged by the camera he shot. Or being personally attacked because he did not shoot Nikon.

Just because I love Nikon film SLR's (not fond of Nikon DSLR's) does that give me any right to tell Pete what camera he should use? WTF? Lot's of crazy stuff.

That would be just so crazy, but I understand that this is the Internet and these guys worked as trolls and had agendas. Recently there was this lawyer who had a racist rant here in NYC. He is now suffering the reprecussions. Today he is saying that he is not a racist. LOL.

So these two guys who acted as trolls thought they could be anonomous, but I know who they are; they both worked at B&H; I know both of them; they both know who I am; their names are Matt and Brennan; they both worked in the used department; they both left New York.

One of their co-workers responded to my question of where they have been since I didn't see them around replied, "Brennen went back home to Nashville, Tennessee and Matt moved to the Pacific Northwest. It is like they came to NYC to punch it off their bucket list."

Who are the real posers here?

Matt gave away his identity by identifying the Zeiss lens diagram tattooed on his forearm.

I do not wish these guys harm, but I do want their karma to follow them so perhaps they can move on. Like I said, "High school behavior." One thing to remember is that the world is not that big. Perhaps I am old school, but respect and integrity does matter.

Cal

 

[pgk]

I'm sure that far cheaper cameras could produce as good results but I'm not bothered about this at all.
I like using rangefinder cameras so there is a limited choice of makers, and I have a number of M fit lenses, but if we applied straightforward logic to every purchase decision we made life would be a great deal more boring.

As I like using Leica rangefinders this is sufficient justification for me given that I am happy to buy used ones which are (often considerably) cheaper than new. Using equipment that I enjoy using allows me to create to better imagery in my experience. I don't hanker after the latest model because the ones I have are serving me well, but I'm more than happy that some do because it means a steady flow of used (sometimes barely) bodies on the secondhand market.