How much is enough? Which Leica?

dave lackey

dave lackey

Veteran
Local time
10:39 AM
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
9,420
IIRC, it was Roger Hicks who first enlightened me on the wisdom of purchasing useful, but beautiful things. I forget the reference... But the idea of making one's functional purchases both useful and aesthetically pleasing strikes an enduring chord with me.

"The simple life" also strikes me as a wonderful way of living while giving one a lot of choices based on one's own desires and needs. Leica has a history of being able to fulfill both the functional/aesthetic values and the simpleness of living in the world of photography with a manual camera. At least the film Leicas but I am not so sure about the latest digital offerings. Still, to me, Leica has a draw that is counter to the high-tech contemporary environment around us.

Each morning, I spend a couple of hours of quiet time before the chaos of each day begins. Relaxing, meditating, praying, cursing, writing, or observing the darkness and dawning of the new day, and sometimes simply going with the thought of the moment. Today, I wondered... is there someone out there actually happy with enough? What is enough? What would that person's life look like? A single scenario of many possibilities:

A person living from one day to the next with few assets or possessions and no permanent home of his own, possibly driving a modest means of transportation, retired or working a part-time job, has what would be considered a simple life. Not that this scenario is recommended for self-enlightenment, but as an example, this person may be a fellow photographer. One who enjoys the passion of photography and enjoys the use of a Leica... his only camera in a bag with a couple of lenses.

Pure reduction to the basics of life with just enough? This may be a life with few stresses from the complex society around him but one filled with a passion for capturing the beauty of the world he lives in and sharing with other people just to see them smile.

Which Leica would he most likely use? Please note that I have reduced the gear of choice to Leica only for a reason. No need to bring in other brands for this discussion.

What do you think of a one-Leica life and the gear of choice while living on quite modest means? Would he/she shoot film or digital? M2, M3, or newer? M8, M9 or a later digital camera?:confused:
 
Sounds like a description of me when I was 21 years old! I had bought an M2 with a 35/2.8 Summaron and 90mm Elmarit. I had a Weston meter, and I was all set, with no need for anything more. My outfit was small and portable, though limited. But by the time I was 30, I added a Nikkormat and a Hasselblad. And with time, more Nikons, more Leicas, more Hasselblads, more lenses.

Would I go back? Well, no, but when flying or traveling light in the car, I might just take two Leicas (last time it was an M6 & M7) with 5 lenses, plus a D-Lux 6 and an X20. Oh, I almost forgot: I had the SWC along. The digitals were for a wedding, and the film gear was for Gettysburg.

Honest, I am trying to lighten up. But first, I must purchase some more lenses . . .
 
Oh, to be clear, the simple life can range from a very modest life to one that I imagine every time I listen to one of my favorites by Stephen Stills, "Southern Cross"...

Clearly, I see the simple life as what goes on between one's ears, not based on the size of the wallet. One man's ability to simplify life may be easier with wealth while another man may be overwhelmed with it. I sometimes just wonder about how much is enough gear while making aesthetic choices.

As I get older, my needs are changing. AF is slowly replacing MF to a degree. But Leica has no affordable AF system. Then life gets less simple living with Leica.
 
Dave,

Beautiful thoughts in a world which increasingly works against this kind of thinking, in which we find ourselves not only distracted, but distracted from our distractions.
The man who can say he has "enough", has something which few people will ever have. He has peace.

Thanks for the musings.

Larry
 
Rob-F said:
Sounds like a description of me when I was 21 years old! I had bought an M2 with a 35/2.8 Summaron and 90mm Elmarit. I had a Weston meter, and I was all set, with no need for anything more. My outfit was small and portable, though limited. But by the time I was 30, I added a Nikkormat and a Hasselblad. And with time, more Nikons, more Leicas, more Hasselblads, more lenses.

Would I go back? Well, no, but when flying or traveling light in the car, I might just take two Leicas (last time it was an M6 & M7) with 5 lenses, plus a D-Lux 6 and an X20. Oh, I almost forgot: I had the SWC along. The digitals were for a wedding, and the film gear was for Gettysburg.

Honest, I am trying to lighten up. But first, I must purchase some more lenses . . .
Click to expand...

Rob,

You are absolutely correct, when I was 21, I was working as an engineer, having been out of university for a couple of years and newly married. Living in an apartment and using an old P&S camera. Life was simple. Life was all passion.

Life is no longer simple and passion has pretty much taken the last train for the coast. The station is empty and the shadows grow long.

Truly a life without passion is unbearable... perhaps it is a good thing to simplify life and focus on the important things. If photography is an art of reduction, then maybe life should reflect the same.

It seems to me that the Leica M-A fits the requirements for a simple life and is just enough. Lenses are another matter altogether.
 
When I was forced into retirement back in 2012, I started looking into selling all my Nikon work stuff as I no longer wanted to carry the weight. I started thinking about some the photographers that I admired and thought going to a small rangefinder camera and a single lens (35mm or 50mm) would be nice. If I were to go Leica, it would probably be with a M4 or M6TTL with a Summicron lens. I would shoot only Tri-X (my favorite film) and send it to Dewayne's Photo for processing. Would have to find a printer that I liked because I was never good at printing.
 
Dave,
asking this question here is going to get the usual same recommendations. Why would a man living a simple life use an expensive camera anyway? It all sounds a bit contradictive and confused to me. I agree that a person with no goals, no wish for material goods is probably less stressed than his counterpart however if you wish to have choice then you lead a different kind of life. The romantic idea of being happy with just one camera and lens is Imho exactly that. Seriously the comment that the M-A fits the requirements for a simple life could have been written by an ad man wearing rose tints!
I've got nothing against living simply but talking Leica in the same sentence is just not going to fly,
regards john
 
nobbylon said:
<snip> Why would a man living a simple life use an expensive camera anyway? <snip>....Seriously the comment that the M-A fits the requirements for a simple life could have been written by an ad man wearing rose tints!
I've got nothing against living simply but talking Leica in the same sentence is just not going to fly
Click to expand...

Inexpensive does not mean simple. Expensive does not mean not simple. Simplicity has absolutely nothing to do with cost.

Someone who has permanently limited himself, with the difficult-for-most-of-us mindset, to an M-A with one lens, with the frame of mind Dave has described, has a simple photographic/life experience. (Or, can have if he is centered enough as a person.....that's the hard part)

Someone who has 12 YashicaMats, 9 Spotmatics with 18 m42 lenses, and 45 Zorkis, 5 of which are working and 40 of which he needs to repair when he has time, who is forever trying to decide which one he needs to take with him today (See: favorite rff anxiety question---"I am going into the next room, which camera should I take???)---- this person has less money tied up in gear, but his experience is anything but simple.

True, someone with the wherewithal to purchase an M-A likely has the money to buy more lenses, and the problem of succumbing to temptation, and loss of the benefits of simplicity creeps in.
Someone who only owns and shoots with one Olympus XA soon discovers he can easily own 8 more, and does. Simple becomes not simple.

It's like the people you find along rural roads in America, living in a trailer with 8 rusted Volkswagons in the yard. They might have been happy with the one, but, no, they now have 8 to deal with.
It's how people are. Most of us understand, on some level, that we would be happier if life were simpler, as Dave alluded to, but we don't have the courage to let go. Mt 19:22 "And when the young man heard that saying he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions." :)
 
nobbylon said:
Dave,
asking this question here is going to get the usual same recommendations. Why would a man living a simple life use an expensive camera anyway? It all sounds a bit contradictive and confused to me. I agree that a person with no goals, no wish for material goods is probably less stressed than his counterpart however if you wish to have choice then you lead a different kind of life. The romantic idea of being happy with just one camera and lens is Imho exactly that. Seriously the comment that the M-A fits the requirements for a simple life could have been written by an ad man wearing rose tints!
I've got nothing against living simply but talking Leica in the same sentence is just not going to fly,
regards john
Click to expand...

Why would a man living a simple life use an expensive camera?:p
It depends on your definition of a simple life as I mentioned above. A wealthy person can live a simple life and can certainly afford a Leica. A poor man, like me, can own a Leica or two... what is wrong with that? Are you saying that simple and poor excludes Leica ownership?

My question, as mentioned above, is what Leica would a simple person use for less stress whether it be computers, initial cost, software, chemicals for film devloping, space, etc.

Yes, it is a contrast! But equating a simple life with wealth (money) is not quite the direction I would choose. I apologize if the OP is confusing because it is not a mainstream topic, people just don't think of living simply or passionately, it is much different than that.... but there is no reason a passionate photographer living modestly cannot buy a Leica to use because he feels it is aesthetically appealing, ergonomically satisfying, and lasts a lifetime (debatable).

It is a struggle for me to buy film or even develop my own.Yet, I shoot my M6 and my Nikon F6 and give the images away to people who appreciate them. I have not had a paycheck since 2008. Nor do I own real property. Does that mean I should not use a nice M6? Does it mean I do not have goals? Passion is my number one personal goal at the moment whether it be just getting out of the house to shoot, or to donate a piece of art to the hospital.

So, yes, you are correct, it isn't going to fly on RFF.... or maybe it will, who knows unless the question is asked?:angel:

What Leica is enough?
 
Agreed on most of what you say Larry. My Dad always asks why I have multiple cameras when all he needed was one with a 50. My reply is usually 'because I can', not because of wealth but because film cameras are in general cheap compaired to what they used to be. This allows gear heads like myself and plenty here to experiment and find what suits best but sometimes one gets carried away. I've simplified myself to a large extent by selling nearly everything I don't use however I still have half a dozen film cameras I rarely use and a D700 that hasn't shot a frame since my M9P purchase. I've been out with the FM2 today just for fun and do like having a choice but in the end none of it is needed. My Dad's old Tl electro and 50 would get pretty similar results.
 
It's a very simple choice for me.

I'm a 50mm shooter, with very little 28mm work as a way of catching a breather, so the M3 is the only Leica body I own. I have two lenses, a compact 50mm Elmar, and the fast 50mm f1.5 Nokton. I'm hoping on replacing both with a compromise of the two, a V4 cron.

One body one lens, that is my final goal with my gear.
 
In that case Dave get an M4 and an M9 for less than the price of an M-A. One film, one digital or would that be too complicated? :)
 
nobbylon said:
In that case Dave get an M4 and an M9 for less than the price of an M-A. One film, one digital or would that be too complicated? :)
Click to expand...

Wonderful! A recommendation and worthy of consideration! I do fancy a single camera ownership again...for some reason, I never thought of an M4. Hmmm. An M9...I dunno...always wanted one of those.

As much as I love my mint M6 with Big Logo, I can't see myself throwing it in a bag for a couple of hard weeks shooting in all kinds of environments. But, maybe it is enough in itself.

Then again, a brass black body Leica M camera... might be cool to put some character marks on it.:angel:
 
Hern said:
It's a very simple choice for me.

I'm a 50mm shooter, with very little 28mm work as a way of catching a breather, so the M3 is the only Leica body I own. I have two lenses, a compact 50mm Elmar, and the fast 50mm f1.5 Nokton. I'm hoping on replacing both with a compromise of the two, a V4 cron.

One body one lens, that is my final goal with my gear.
Click to expand...

Dang, I wish I were that resolute... sounds cool like when I got my first Nikon FM 36 years ago... no thinking, just grab and go.
 
dave lackey said:
Quite...;)
Click to expand...

A person living from one day to the next with few assets or possessions and no permanent home of his own, possibly driving a modest means of transportation, retired or working a part-time job, has what would be considered a simple life. Not that this scenario is recommended for self-enlightenment, but as an example, this person may be a fellow photographer. One who enjoys the passion of photography and enjoys the use of a Leica... his only camera in a bag with a couple of lenses.
Click to expand...

Sounds contrived. No home, but a Leica with a couple of lenses?

Enjoying a simple life doesn't require any particular brand of anything...more than likely it's the absence of branding that enhances the simplicity...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom