How much is enough? Which Leica?

Larry Cloetta said:
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." :)
Click to expand...


Larry, I love your analogy.:cool:

My first car was a 62 Beetle. Loving symmetry in life, and contrasts, I would love to have another vintage VW. But only ONE!:p
 
Hi,

Simple life to me doesn't mean cameras or just a camera. It's all the baggage that comes with it that's the problem. You know, computers, printers, ink cartridges, or labs, transport to labs and so on and so forth.

Regards, David
 
Cost is relative when simplifying things.

You can buy an inexpensive camera, only to have it break down all the time, costing money in either repairs or replacement.

You can also buy an expensive camera and two or three equally expensive lenses, or buy twenty pieces of lesser cost gear for the same money.

Simplification is also relative to the type of photography one does. It might be simpler for someone who is interested in taking all sorts of photos to have the gear that will help them accomplish their vision, which one camera and two or three lenses just isn't going to get it.

I'm simplifying by returning to my roots, and getting back to using mostly one camera brand for each format (Nikon for 35mm, Rollei for 6x6, Zeiss for larger MF folders), though I will admit to a recent purchase of a Leica R3 because I want to be able to use the lenses. More of a boutique brand to me, as I'm not a pro by any definition (I was having a "Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz" moment).

Some day I see myself going the one camera, two or three lens route. But hopefully not too soon. I do have a day bag with just that set-up though.

PF
 
splitimageview said:
Perhaps reply to the thoughts about simplicity rather than resort to accusations....
Click to expand...

OK, I posted two positive well-meaning threads and you have brought up arguments and negativity on both of them. You may start your own thread. Your negativity is NOT welcome on this one.
 
Absurd premise for the consumerism that shines through this.

Simplicity? Almost any good digital P&S — look at Moriyama. You obviously already have a computer on which you can post process.

Once you start talking about an M-A or an M4, you have to decide on where you buy film and its availability when you travel, whether you develop it or have it done, and how you print it (digitally or nor). And even just to show it on the web you have to scan; if you won't have expensive darkroom prints made you also have to scan — and today there simply is no good scanning solution for prints over 4x6 or 5x7 inches without serious complications or extensive costs. So there's no simplicity in this solution.

_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
 
Where I live cost of living on retirement and othewr factors leaves no choice, but digital P&S.
I see it happening even with George Zimbel and Fred Herzog. Lecia and film shooters in the past, non Leica digital P&S users as of now.
 
Thank you.

Any P&S can provide great images and is the definition of simplicity, if that's the goal.

If you want an M-A just buy one and be done with it. No need for the unicorn and rainbow wrapping paper. :)
 
splitimageview said:
Thank you.

Any P&S can provide great images and is the definition of simplicity, if that's the goal.

If you want an M-A just buy one and be done with it. No need for the unicorn and rainbow wrapping paper. :)
Click to expand...

And thank you for a more "on-point" response... hopefully we can move forward with more civility and respect. I will do my part!
 
Dave, love your approach to the early morning.
Your thoughts made me think of Jack Reacher with a camera ...
I think he'd select the M4 - nothing to go wrong barring mechanical failure - framlines for the 35 lenses - so no need for external finders.
He'd shoot any film he could get cheap - including expired and 2nd hand.
And he'd develop in coffee to save cash.
As for scanning or printing - well ... there are options open to a guy like Jack.

P.S. my location right now is Bordeaux, and I've just finished reading a Jack Reacher novel - that should explain a lot ;-)
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Where I live cost of living on retirement and othewr factors leaves no choice, but digital P&S.
I see it happening even with George Zimbel and Fred Herzog. Lecia and film shooters in the past, non Leica digital P&S users as of now.
Click to expand...

I understand your point. It also should be mentioned that AF and the aging factor are connected. I have no problem with developing my own film. I have a year supply of film in the freezer and tons of chemicals. My latest documentary is being done with the M6 and the F6. The best results have been with the F6 and I just donated a canvas to Emory Rehab Hospital. That piece of artwork was not possible with the M6, as much as I love it.

So, in a few years, I expect to be more/all/ AF than MF. But for awhile, I hope to use the LTM lenses because they are good, and the M body is more pleasing to use. Aesthetics, feel, etc., all part of the experience.

David is correct about the lack of simplicity in photography these days but with my buddy's lab, I can shoot, drop off the film and obtain what I need with no computer work. He can easily make minor adjustments if I ask.

So, yes, simplicity becomes a necessity, not just a luxury with each passing year. It is rather poignant that they will intersect at about the same time in life for me. All that is left is my bucket list of enjoying various gear before I settle on that one camera for the rest of the way.
 
First, you need to decide what your game is: what do you want to specialise in, photographically. Leica can be great for some types of photography, and not so great for others, plus if you stick to film, there is the issue of negative size. So, for example, if your game is street or generic people photography, including half body portraits, and you are happy with 30x45cm max output, I would stick to a film camera. If it is portraits only, then an M3 appears the logical choice, if it is mainly street, then M7 wins in my book. If you however like colour landscapes, then perhaps one of the latest digital versions would be much more practical. The key is to work from back to front: 1 - what type of output, 2- what style of photography, 3- given the previous two points, what type of camera.
 
Hi,

It's beginning to look like the M2 and a Weston (and an SLR and a compact P&S) for me but perhaps not for you. I picked the M2 because it doesn't need batteries and the framelines I use are built in.

Thinking about batteries leads me to something like the Olympus OM-1(N) which is mechanical but takes two SR44's for the metering but it's manual focus... OTOH, there's a lot of people out there who can repair it but I can't speak for other cameras.

My worry about AF is that it's electronic and electronics fail and that means death as no one seems able to repair them. I also wonder if the eyepiece and screens of MF cameras cause the problems some of us have. I've SLR's that are easy to focus and some that seem to be but are not.

I'll add that another advantage of SLR's is that you can stick one lens on them and never bother about another for most of your shooting; that means something like a 28-90mm with close up ability.

And, of course, for real simplicity I'd stick to B&W but that still means a darkroom or some super expensive scanner, or else B&W slides but that's starting to get complicated again.

I don't think there's a simple answer to what seems a simple problem and I've not even gone down the Trip35, XA1 & XA2 path yet but they have advantages.

Regards, David
 
The simple life would not involve photography. Of all the pastimes to choose, there is so much extra stuff to go with it. One camera and lens? A film camera and we add in all the developing and printing equipment plus a darkroom. Don't forget mountains of negatives. Digital and we add in a computer and printer, and mountains of hard drives, batteries and whatever.
Simple life?
Try running. A pair of shoes* and a pair of shorts and the ground.

*shoes are optional.
 
michaelwj said:
The simple life would not involve photography. Of all the pastimes to choose, there is so much extra stuff to go with it. One camera and lens? A film camera and we add in all the developing and printing equipment plus a darkroom. Don't forget mountains of negatives. Digital and we add in a computer and printer, and mountains of hard drives, batteries and whatever.
Simple life?
Try running. A pair of shoes* and a pair of shorts and the ground.

*shoes are optional.
Click to expand...

Yep, did the running thing then after years that evolved to walking 5miles a day and cycling another hour. Great thing to do! But not so much for art...

Simplicity, as Larry says is not reduction to nothing or as close as possible to nothing... It means, to me at least, reduction of anything that complicates life, duplicates existing things or processes, or otherwise makes focus on life and the important things difficult.

I cannot think of anything more along the lines of simplicity and elegance than my good friend, Boris with his M2. He carries the M2 to the jungles of Malaysia and to the streets of Europe with ease. His results are amazing. His interaction with the people is enviable and I am forever impressed with his sharing and helping those whom he befriends along the way.

Truly, shooting film is pretty simple. Then he develops and makes his own prints in a darkroom. Complex? Yes. Simple? Not for me but it is for him with a perfected workflow. He is very efficient on top of being very creative. So, simplicity does not have to be void of complexity or even technology.

The M2/3/MP/M-A approach seems to be the preferred route for me.

Digital... never say never. So, I won't.

RFF is such a wonderful place to be, meeting interesting and learning from their wealth of knowledge. Thanks to all.:)
 
tunalegs said:
If one truly appreciated simplicity, I doubt a Leica would be the camera of their choice.
Click to expand...

Ah... Back to work for me so I must go...maybe tomorrow we can delve further. However, the reason Leica is the only brand selection, subjective, yes, with the original premise of simplicity with... Aesthetics and elegance. I have owned six Leicas over the years and I find that Leica M bodies fit the premise of simple and beautiful better than any other camera.

Truth be known... My favorite all-time camera is the black FM3a I had to sell. It is my favorite for reasons that are hard to quantify. I am excluding that selection from this discussion for my own reasons unrelated to this discussion.

Which Leica? It is an interesting question isn't it?:p
 
As a personal aside, I admire your morning routine, and I think your quest to simplify is admirable, as well.
 
Simple life starts when you realize that you are no longer in position to have to prove anything to anybody. And that means to yourself also. So after that point life is simple and careless. Before it you will keep searching and satisfying needs that are not really yours.So K.I.S.S. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom