How did you get out of Leica?

[Dogman]

Well, of course an M10 isn't mid range. LOL

A mid-range Canon or Nikon body can be far more expensive than an M6, but only one of those will be worth half in short order...

Yet people don't bat an eye at the price of the Canon, and are astonished at the price of an M6, thinking it somehow elite...

It's rather silly, as one can put money into a film Leica and easily get it all back, and sometimes more, if one buys right; that'll never happen with the Canikon.

You're right, of course.

But when you consider the M6 is now only available as a second hand camera these days, you probably should compare the prices of used Canon and Nikon DSLRs to used Leicas. Those used DSLRs are pretty cheap and every bit as useable today as they were when first introduced.

Anyway, I agree Leicas are worth every bit as much as someone is willing to pay for them.

 

[Huss]

I got in when I renewed my interest in photography, and it was the digital M-E that did it as I wanted a camera that didn't have a tonne of features I had no interest in.
Then I found out that the lenses work on all Leica Ms, and as my Dad had an M3 I thought it would be cool to get one, and so got back into film photography.
I then thought it would be fun to have an old film SLR - as they are now pennies on the dollar - so picked up a Nikon F2.

So how did I get out of Leica? Well, I didn't but I realized that there were so many other cameras out there (now dirt cheap) that also are superb, and sometimes I just like to use those.

Also, there are some breathtaking non Leica cameras and deals. Possibly my favorite film camera is the Nikon F4. It was $2000 in 1988. Adjusted for inflation that is $4300. I bought my perfect condition one last year for $190!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Well, of course an M10 isn't mid range. LOL

A mid-range Canon or Nikon body can be far more expensive than an M6, but only one of those will be worth half in short order...

Yet people don't bat an eye at the price of the Canon, and are astonished at the price of an M6, thinking it somehow elite...

It's rather silly, as one can put money into a film Leica and easily get it all back, and sometimes more, if one buys right; that'll never happen with the Canikon.

Canon RP has same high ISO as M10, plus AF and dust reduction.
It is 999 USD new. Canon RF L lenses are very comparable with Leica lenses in price.
Canon FF DSLR is cheaper than Leica AF cropper. And Canon L EF lenses are much cheaper than Leica lenses.

If you sit on M and run few rolls per year it might be sold with no loss, at least. But try to use film M as digital and it will need CLA and parts. Which aren't cheap.
My consumer graded Canon DSLR has near 200K exposures taken without service. My M4-2 crapped out after 4K exposures. I was waiting for months to get new parts. Which are getting rusted now. I was told to get ready for new curtains. New curtains are 200 USD and CLA for it is 240. With another 80 USD for insured shipping.
Canon is in 20 minutes drive.

 

[Kai-san]

I think it's quite obvious what game Leica is playing by handing out free cameras to the Hollywood "stars". They would clearly like everyone else to feel that they are part of an elite club by buying into this fiction. Not that I think anyone on this forum has fallen for that ruse. I have no problems with Leica owners that feels that their cameras are the best tool for their use. But you clearly have to pay the price for "fame" if you buy a new Leica. Even my Contax 645 system with 5 Zeiss lenses can match the price of a new Leica with one lens. The downside is of course that I won't be approached on the streets by starry-eyed girls exclaiming: "Oooooh, is that a Leica?" 😀

 

[Deleted member 65559]

The downside is of course that I won't be approached on the streets by starry-eyed girls exclaiming: "Oooooh, is that a Leica?" 😀

K, I know the feeling. People would ask me if my Deardorff 5x7 was a Hasselblad.... 😱

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I still have my combat tested M4 and a DR Summicron but other than that, I'm not a Leica shooter, primarily. I really like the camera and occasionally take it out but I really don't think I need more than one, although black paint always calls...
What got me really turned off about Leica is the incredible pricing, the boutique fashion accessory camera, instead of a reliable professional tool. I tried to love them as a company but their lack of support due to my not spending upwards of $100,000 on lenses and cameras, left me out in the wind when I was needing a reliable camera for making money, not a camera out at a service center getting repaired. The film cameras work brilliantly but the digital cameras were awful for professional use, in my opinion. That's why I'm out.

Phil Forrest

 

[steveyork]

Canon RP has same high ISO as M10, plus AF and dust reduction.
It is 999 USD new. Canon RF L lenses are very comparable with Leica lenses in price.
Canon FF DSLR is cheaper than Leica AF cropper. And Canon L EF lenses are much cheaper than Leica lenses.

If you sit on M and run few rolls per year it might be sold with no loss, at least. But try to use film M as digital and it will need CLA and parts. Which aren't cheap.
My consumer graded Canon DSLR has near 200K exposures taken without service. My M4-2 crapped out after 4K exposures. I was waiting for months to get new parts. Which are getting rusted now. I was told to get ready for new curtains. New curtains are 200 USD and CLA for it is 240. With another 80 USD for insured shipping.
Canon is in 20 minutes drive.

Ha, ha, so your M4-2 has lasted about 40+ years before it crapped out, and you're complaining? 🙂

I get your point though; the myth of Leica doesn't always stand up to reality. Leica's aren't the most reliable, and some cameras are starting to face age related material failures, especially any plastic parts, but any mechanical camera will outlive a digital camera, over the long run. Get the M4-2 fixed, and it'll good for another big chunk of time. At some point, your digital SLR will be kaput, and you'll have to buy a whole new camera. At least you can get the Leica fixed 40+ years after it was manufactured. That actually sounds pretty good to me.

 

[steveyork]

...So how did I get out of Leica? Well, I didn't but I realized that there were so many other cameras out there (now dirt cheap) that also are superb, and sometimes I just like to use those.

Also, there are some breathtaking non Leica cameras and deals. Possibly my favorite film camera is the Nikon F4. It was $2000 in 1988. Adjusted for inflation that is $4300. I bought my perfect condition one last year for $190!

So true. A lot of quality film cameras out there for almost next to nothing, especially the SLR's. Affordable even when you factor in a CLA. And the old lenses are really nice for B&W too.

No one needs a Leica rangefinder to take a good picture. Maybe we should all be shooting FTb's and SRT's. Where do you draw the line? Guess it's individual.

 

[Beemermark]

My consumer graded Canon DSLR has near 200K exposures taken without service. My M4-2 crapped out after 4K exposures.

The only other person I've seen on the forum that shares my consensus the M4-2 was crap that just about shut the Leica doors.

I really don't think it is apples to apples comparing digital to film. I have 3 or 4 high dollar "state of the art" digital cameras over 5~10 years old that aren't worth the effort to even try selling. Forget any needed repairs, they aren't worth it. A complete overhaul (more than a CLA) of a Leica film body from the most respected Leica repair shop won't run over $500, and it will last another 30 years before needing maintenance. Compare that to my D750 introduced in 2014. 2 years ago mine malfunctioned, Nikon would not honor the warranty without a receipt proving I bought from a USA Nikon dealer (about 3 years ago for $1500) and the repair cost was ~$700 at an authorized Nikon repair shop. Today the Nikon isn't worth what I paid for the repair while the M4 is worth twice what I paid for it 5 years ago.

And there is no comparable film RF on the market today or in the last 20 years to compare with a film M model.

 

[Beemermark]

No one needs a Leica rangefinder to take a good picture. Maybe we should all be shooting FTb's and SRT's. Where do you draw the line? Guess it's individual.

You're right. I have to get out my Kodak Brownie and sell the Leicas.

 

[Nokton48]

I sold all my Leica and Canon rangefinders (cameras lenses and accessories) and put the money back in the bank.

I then built the Minolta SRT/SRM/XK system that I could only dream about when I was young.

And still had a lot of money left over and no regrets at all. Photos look about the same and I find I prefer Rokkor glass.

 

[splitimageview]

If you sit on M and run few rolls per year it might be sold with no loss, at least. But try to use film M as digital and it will need CLA and parts.

Haha, don't know anyone who uses any film camera as a digital, but even if Gary Winogrand was still around he'd still be able to get his M serviced; if he were shooting Canon he'd have been through 12 bodies over the same time frame. 😀

Seriously, I was just comparing the comments of those who think a $1200 Leica film body is outrageously expensive but think nothing of a $3000 Canon digital body, when the former will still be worth at least that much (if not a lot more) in a few years, whereas the Canon will be worthless.

 

[Bill Clark]

I’m not getting out of Leica cameras.

When I’m carrying them around, out in the open, people think I’m a much better photographer than I actually Am.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

The only other person I've seen on the forum that shares my consensus the M4-2 was crap that just about shut the Leica doors."

I used M4-2 on a couple of occasions and never really cared for them. Compared to M2s and early M4s which were smooth as silk to operate, the M4-2 always felt to me as if it had sand in the gears. Having said that, a colleague of mine bought two of them in 1977 and has used them hard in climbing, skiing and travelling all over the world. They never failed him, though I have to say that his ship came in. He had one stolen (or he left it behind) on a bus. The insurance company replaced it with a black paint MP and a 35 Summicron ASPH..... so the M4-2s don't owe him a thing.....

 

[RObert Budding]

Well, of course an M10 isn't mid range. LOL

A mid-range Canon or Nikon body can be far more expensive than an M6, but only one of those will be worth half in short order...

Yet people don't bat an eye at the price of the Canon, and are astonished at the price of an M6, thinking it somehow elite...

It's rather silly, as one can put money into a film Leica and easily get it all back, and sometimes more, if one buys right; that'll never happen with the Canikon.

If you want to compare the M6 cost to other cameras, then the correct comparison is to a film body. And, yes, the M6 is far more expensive than say, a Nikon F100. The flip side, of course, is that it is your money, to spend as you like. Even if different people percieve value differently.

 

[Huss]

My M4-2 is just as nice to use as my other Ms.
The only issue I have had with it is Leica used plastic anchors for the flash sync plugs, which snap right off. I avoid this happening by not using the plug caps.

I occasionally use a Nikon S2 which is very nice, for my non Leica RF fix, but every time I use a Leica after that, it's - oh yeah! Just such a nice experience.

 

[Pál_K]

...
F2 is Komatsu. Not sexy and heavy. It is made to be driven through the dirt and still works while and after it. Perfection to last.

...
The Nikon F2 with meterless prism is my personal favorite manual/mechanical camera.
...

It looks wonderful. I agree that F2's are solid take-everywhere cameras (the same can be said of the Canon F-1,n,N series). My F2's all wear a variety of metering heads, which I think make them a bit clunky (I use pre-AI lenses with them). I've passed on plain-prism F2's before with the logic that I already have plain-prism F's and part of the F2's forte is in its metering. Not convincing myself...

...

Also, there are some breathtaking non Leica cameras and deals. Possibly my favorite film camera is the Nikon F4. It was $2000 in 1988. Adjusted for inflation that is $4300. I bought my perfect condition one last year for $190!

The F4 has probably been the best film-Nikon bargain for at least the last eight years. Some complain of slow autofocus and its single focus area, but for some of us that's not a limitation. I like its dedicated external controls: each photographic function has its own dedicated knob, lever, or whatever. It was, I think, the inspiration for the Df's design.

Probably the only better value/features/quality for extremely little money is a Nikkormat FT2.

Oddly, what I find that competes with Leica for quick unobtrusive photography is not a QL17, 7sII, or 35RC, but.... an Olympus Pen FT!

 

[teddy]

I am WAYYYY to far in....

 

[Rangefinder 35]

I got my first Leica (M4), when I was going backpacking in Patagonia. Now I think that if I hd just bought my Contax G2, I would've come back with many more images. Then I sold M4, and bought M6 (Ti) for my backpacking in New Zealand. I also brought with me Contax G2, It was easier to bracket with G2. M6 was also prone to breaking down, and I spent a fortune paying for repairs. When I compared the scanned images from Leica with those from Contax, I liked the Contax's better. After that I gave up on my Leica dream, and stuck with Contax almost exclusively.

 

[steveyork]

I got my first Leica (M4), when I was going backpacking in Patagonia. Now I think that if I hd just bought my Contax G2, I would've come back with many more images. Then I sold M4, and bought M6 (Ti) for my backpacking in New Zealand. I also brought with me Contax G2, It was easier to bracket with G2. M6 was also prone to breaking down, and I spent a fortune paying for repairs. When I compared the scanned images from Leica with those from Contax, I liked the Contax's better. After that I gave up on my Leica dream, and stuck with Contax almost exclusively.

Ha, ha, what got me into Leica rangefinders was a broken Contax G1. 🙂 Boring world if we all had the same experiences.