Body or Glass person

M

Mcary

Well-known
Local time
1:51 PM
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
1,953
So are you a body or glass person? Personally I consider myself more of a body person.

I consider myself a body person due the fact that given the choice of using a non Leica digital camera and top of the line Leica glass or using a Leica digital camera and older not so top of the line Leica or non Leica glass such a that produced by Canon, Nikkor, Voigtander, ext I'd choose the latter.
 
Mcary said:
So are you a body or glass person? Personally I consider myself more of a body person.

I consider myself a body person due the fact that given the choice of using a non Leica digital camera and top of the line Leica glass or using a Leica digital camera and older not so top of the line Leica or non Leica glass such a that produced by Canon, Nikkor, Voigtander, ext I'd choose the latter.
Click to expand...
In theory, and mostly in practice, I'm a "glass person" who is firmly of the belief that camera bodies come and go but lenses are forever. However I've spectacularly departed from that in acquiring a Leica M240. Why? A love of rangefinders and the fact that Leica is the only game in town when it comes to full-frame (35mm) optical-viewfinder, RF-focused digital camera bodies. So if I want that I have to play the Leica game simply because of lack of other choices. (M240 vs M9 vs M9P vs ME is a different thing, which evolved more by accident than design.)

Note that while I have and really enjoy a Leica M3, my first and truest love in film rangefinders is the Konica Hexar RF; so I'm hardly a reflexive Leica bigot.

Note also that this was in many ways driven by my liking for the many M and LTM lenses I had long before my first (and only) digital RF. I would not have bought my digital M if I didn't already have those and want to use them on a digital RF body. Otherwise I might well have stuck with DSLRs and film for RFs. Or just maybe, barely, perhaps, have gone down the Fujifilm X100(s) or X Pro-1 path.

Yet I think not - I resisted that long before I came into the wherewithal (by way of a bequest) to go down the Leica digital RF path (which is only very, very, recent). The reason I didn't pursue the Fujifilm experience was that while those I'd even consider do have optical viewfinders (which I consider a must for any camera I use; having a reflexive and possibly absurd dislike for EVFs) they are not RF cameras and so really wouldn't do what I want. In that sense I guess I'm a "body person" in that an RF body is important to me for some types of photography I really enjoy (while remaining very happy with my DSLRs for other types of photography).

...Miike
 
Typically Glass person, unless I change systems with a different mount...then my Nikon glass stays, but, the old system glass goes along with the body...
I may change to newer body I already have a few lenses with if it is a worthy upgrade for me.
 
Well, I've sold more bodies than lenses, so I suppose that puts me in the glass camp. I'd be willing to claim otherwise if someone wants to bribe me with an M9/ME.
 
Body for sure... the body is in my hands, so it is important that I like the way it feels and reacts. Most lenses are pretty good these days, so, I don't stress that too much.
 
I use Canon Tilt-shifts, Leica standard and wide lenses, a Minolta telephoto and a Sigma super-tele...on one body mount.

Glass person it is :D
 
Different bodies and how they function I can get used to that...but what I get due to how a lens is designed is something I've been paying attention to a lot more lately...
I'm a lens person...
 
In general, glass -- once I find a body I like, I typically stick with it but regularly buy/sell lenses.

Of course, if I ever acquire sufficient funds to afford an M240 or Monochrom, it may convince me to become a 'body' person. ;)
 
I suppose you would say I'm a body person. I have been using Leicas since my first in 1956 or so. I have a visual problem or rather maybe a visualization problem. I have never been able to see this mystical 'magic' superiority of Leitz lenses. In point of fact I am not able to discern many of the things others can obviously see. Someone can display a picture on one of the forums and will then display a second picture with supposedly having made changes in processing and in all honesty and with great care I am rarely able to discern the difference. This why I rarely comment on quality of an image just maybe sometimes composition. In one respect this makes me very happy because I am immenitely satisfied with my VC lenses on my 2 M8's plus financially better off. I can rarely see anything but mechanical differences in any major lense be it Leitz,Zeiss,Canon,Nikkor or some other well known makes.
 
before, i think i was a body person as the camera, feel & features, was what i bought into.
now…i think it's the glass, specifically the fuji 23/56 combo.
 
It's all about the glass. Particularly, legacy glass. Lenses, regardless of brand, take on certain characteristics that are unique to the light that has passed through them over time. A transmutation on a molecular level perhaps, or an unexplored physics of light that imbues the glass with presence or soul that resonates with the eyes and pineal gland of those who can see it. :)
 
I have a lot of bodies & glass from different makers, but since the vast majority of the bodies are RFs, I guess I'm a "body person".
 
During the time w/ film is was most definitely the glass.

In the world of digital, it is the sensor (foveon vs xtran vs Bayer not really mp now that we are at 16 as the sweet spot).. The glass second, body third and overall system cost next.

Dream camera
- foveon sensor csc w/ control layout of Fuji xp1

Gary
 
A little of both, depending on the definition.


A body person in the sense that I am picky about the design and ease of use. It's the thing that's going to be in my hands, so that matters a lot. Doesn't help that I'm also studying design, either! But within that, I'm not picky--I have an M5, had two different Bessas, and switched between Nikon and Canon EOS twice.
Conversely, not a body person in the sense that I collect them in any way. I admire the design of Contax and Olympus, but I can't justify in my head more systems. And sadly, never really got along with Pentax bodies, despite the phenomenal lenses. (when you work the used desk at a camera store, you spend a lot of time fiddling with equipment)

A lens person in the sense that I love the wonderful selection of lenses for Leica mount, Voigtlander included. the LTM Canon 50s and Voigtlander 35s are some of my favorite lenses, period.
 
Neither. I'm a system person: I like various lenses, I like various bodies. I have to like both working together to really enjoy a camera.

G
 
I'm a leg man...oops, I mean lens man. I've tried a few bodies and settled eventually on the M6 as my favourite, and now use an ME for digital, but could easily change them for others if needed. With glass, on the other hand, I have specific favourites like the C-Sonnar and the Planar in my Rolleiflex 2.8C that I couldn't live without.
 
Since I own many more lenses than bodies, I guess I am a glass man. I must also be a 50mm man since I own 22 various versions.
 
Glass.

Glass has always been the limiting factor, the body never mattered much in what the final image was. But with digital, bodies are more important because they house the precious sensor. Sensors are kinda important because you can't just change them after 24 shots...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom