Leica these days (a little rant)

[Ansel]

Can you elaborate?

I just can't see how this is true, but maybe I have it all wrong?!

I make my living taking photos using film just the same as I always have done. The only change to my black and white work is the use of digital Fstop timers from Heiland and RHDesigns, otherwise its all pretty much unchanged. Oh yes, and I have a film scanner. But that's it.

 

[Mcary]

I'm sure you're right. I'm sure it's a tiny percentage making money from film, but I too would be interested in the stats. And of course, how are we defining a living? I read on Ken Rockwell's site that the median pay in the USA for photographers is $29k per year. Obviously it depends on where and how you live, but $29k in London is barely a living really. I doubt it's much of a living in the more expensive cities in the USA too like NY or San Francisco.

I'd say a person could make a pretty good living being paid $29k per year as a photographer,,that is as longs as their significant other had a job that paid the same or much higher depending on what area of the country you live in.

 

[zuiko85]

"I am an aspiring professional photographer..."

Many professional photographers manage just fine with "lesser" digital cameras than Leica's offerings. Is this a 'need' or a 'want'?

A further note.
There are a lot of folks here who could not even consider a M6 much less Leica glass. Be glad of what you have.

 

[FrankS]

So, the OP is in his early 20's, has an M6, a Fuji X100, and the new Ricoh GR.
Sorry, no sympathy from me. How about some cheese?

And I freely apologize if I've misread you, and you've been working on an oil rig or some such difficult but financially rewarding job, and you've actually bought the cameras you do have with money that you have earned with your own labour. But it sounds, and again I apologize if I'm wrong, that a full frame Leica digital camera is too expensive for your parents to buy for you.

 

[Fraser]

I make my living taking photos using film just the same as I always have done. The only change to my black and white work is the use of digital Fstop timers from Heiland and RHDesigns, otherwise its all pretty much unchanged. Oh yes, and I have a film scanner. But that's it.

Ah so you scan your film well you are shooting digital then😉
I'm in the process of selling three 1dmk111 bodies each with at least 150,000 shutter actuations bought around 2009, I know you don't shoot as much with film so even if its 150,000 shots! film would not be cheaper for me.

 

[ferider]

Ah so you scan your film well you are shooting digital then😉
I'm in the process of selling three 1dmk111 bodies each with at least 150,000 shutter actuations bought around 2009, I know you don't shoot as much with film so even if its 150,000 shots! film would not be cheaper for me.

Wow, more than 300 shutter actuations per day. What do you do with all these photos ? Clearly film would be too expensive for you 🙂

Funny, how a student complaining about not being able to afford 2 M9 cameras is morphing into a film vs. digital thread.

Roland.

 

[Ronald M]

Amazing things can be done with film & scanning. Workflow may be too long for your assignments.

For fast turnarounds gigs, buy a Nikon D7100 + kit lens or 35 1,8 G + 60 2.8 G, current one only, maybe a 24 screw drive focus 2.8. The crop will make this same as 35,50, 90 and will not break the bank.

Pros must have back up gear. Leica will be only marginally better and then not until you are a LR/Photoshop expert.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

I got the digital Leica in and out of my system over the last few years. They can be wonderful cameras but if you are poor and using your camera for income, buy a pro series Nikon or Canon DSLR (single digit) and some excellent lenses. You can't be waiting around for two to four months while your camera is being repaired (Leica) due to issues they have had and still have.

Make your mark with a reliable tool then use your M6 on your own time for your own personal work until you can afford the full frame Leica.

I want a Ferrari 430GT but why do they have to be so expensive?

Phil Forrest

 

[Michael Markey]

So, the OP is in his early 20's, has an M6, a Fuji X100, and the new Ricoh GR.
Sorry, no sympathy from me. How about some cheese?

And I freely apologize if I've misread you, and you've been working on an oil rig or some such difficult but financially rewarding job, and you've actually bought the cameras you do have with money that you have earned with your own labour. But it sounds, and again I apologize if I'm wrong, that a full frame Leica digital camera is too expensive for your parents to buy for you.

My thoughts too.

 

[twopointeight]

I'm a pro with 30+ years. I still have an M6 for certain things. I owned an M8.2 for 2 years to get the feel and shoot a project. It's thicker than the M6, vibrates more so holding slower shutter speeds is not as good as a film M. Backup is not affordable. Service is expensive and untimely. It's not a pro choice for working photographers. But an M6 with 50 rolls of film can still do a nice b&w project. That's the niche for an M6. Use it and differentiate your work with it, (along with some good ideas shot well).

 

[MCTuomey]

If you're an aspiring professional I'd suggest you let your business market decree which camera will be of most use to you.

Make enough money doing your job and you can buy yourself the MM (or future equivalent) either through your business or as a personal 'toy.'

+1 if your aspirations include positive cash flow, choose gear with an eye to maximum utility, which likely keeps a leica dRF off the list.

 

[squareshooter]

I would ask -- do you want to be a professional photographer or do you want to own a fancy Leica? I am unsure just what kind photos you want to take professionally that make the digital Leica a must have. I know hundreds of professional photogs who "made do" with less-than-the-top-brand cameras, lenses and strobes until they made the big bucks. I did. Remember, nobody cares what kind of typewriter Hemingway wrote his stores on.

 

[henri klein]

I think the future is digital also. But the future is film too. Don't sweat it. Think about the images not the gear. Put all your efforts, financial and emotional into improving your photography - you already own a camera that is better than what most of the greats (Cartier Bresson, etc.) had available to them. And if you must have a digital M, wait a few years and they will come down in price SH substantially. In fact your M6 will likely be worth more than the latest M before not too long.

Agree mostly. However, the future in unknown, and remains to be so.

 

[Dunn]

Hey guys,
This is definitely a me just wanting a digital M. I don't think that I need one. I just think that I work the best with my M6 so therefore I think a digital M would be my digital of choice. I'm not planning on even trying to get one soon. The point is, I would just like to try one out to see if it even matches my experience with the M6. Like some of you have said I will probably go with Nikon (I hate the size though) or possibly an x-pro in the future. Looking out for the x-pro 2.

Also, some one said they have no sympathy for me because I have an M6, X100 and Ricoh GR. I definitely worked a ****ty restaurant job for every piece of camera equipment I own. I never received anything as a gift. And I take my purchases seriously. The Ricoh GR was the first brand new camera I've bought in maybe 5+ years.

I'm aspiring to work in journalism so it's hard to get work and use an M6. For personal work it's my go to camera. I usually use my X100, but I will need something more versatile in the future.

I know you guys are right and I shouldn't get hung up on Leica, but, I can't help but want a digital one. And like I said, it will probably be a long time before I ever get one or possibly never. I just had to rant about it a little.

 

[FrankS]

Hey guys,
This is definitely a me just wanting a digital M. I don't think that I need one. I just think that I work the best with my M6 so therefore I think a digital M would be my digital of choice. I'm not planning on even trying to get one soon. The point is, I would just like to try one out to see if it even matches my experience with the M6. Like some of you have said I will probably go with Nikon (I hate the size though) or possibly an x-pro in the future. Looking out for the x-pro 2.

Also, some one said they have no sympathy for me because I have an M6, X100 and Ricoh GR. I definitely worked a ****ty restaurant job for every piece of camera equipment I own. I never received anything as a gift. And I take my purchases seriously. The Ricoh GR was the first brand new camera I've bought in maybe 5+ years.

I'm aspiring to work in journalism so it's hard to get work and use an M6. For personal work it's my go to camera. I usually use my X100, but I will need something more versatile in the future.

I know you guys are right and I shouldn't get hung up on Leica, but, I can't help but want a digital one. And like I said, it will probably be a long time before I ever get one or possibly never. I just had to rant about it a little.

As I said I would if warranted, I apologize for misreading your situation!

Now, you comment on Leica being expensive these days, I ask you when has Leica ever Not been expensive?

 

[clayne]

I shoot film professionally and have done for decades, and all told it is neither expensive or time consuming compared to digital in my experience, in fact it is faster and cheaper.

While i do recognize that scanning, cropping, and spotting does take measurable time, many of the people stating that the "processing stages" of film take up time they could be using for money discount the fact that they're not just popping in cards and printing out digital images without hours of screwing around with RAW files. This time is not overlappable with other tasks. Waiting for film to dry is an overlappable time stop, waiting for scans to end is semi-overlappable. In the end digital can end up faster or slower overall depending on subject matter and technical approach but I don't think it's an instant gain of 4-8 hours or anything like that.

 

[doolittle]

Hey guys,
This is definitely a me just wanting a digital M. I don't think that I need one. I just think that I work the best with my M6 so therefore I think a digital M would be my digital of choice. I'm not planning on even trying to get one soon. The point is, I would just like to try one out to see if it even matches my experience with the M6. Like some of you have said I will probably go with Nikon (I hate the size though) or possibly an x-pro in the future. Looking out for the x-pro 2.

Also, some one said they have no sympathy for me because I have an M6, X100 and Ricoh GR. I definitely worked a ****ty restaurant job for every piece of camera equipment I own. I never received anything as a gift. And I take my purchases seriously. The Ricoh GR was the first brand new camera I've bought in maybe 5+ years.

I'm aspiring to work in journalism so it's hard to get work and use an M6. For personal work it's my go to camera. I usually use my X100, but I will need something more versatile in the future.

I know you guys are right and I shouldn't get hung up on Leica, but, I can't help but want a digital one. And like I said, it will probably be a long time before I ever get one or possibly never. I just had to rant about it a little.

Ranting is fine, I think it is one of the functions of forum, letting of steam from GAS build ups.

The first rangefinder I owned was an M6. I really bonded with the camera. Using it was a big learning curve, but definitely worth it. It made me dissatisfied with my dSLR. I thought the answer was to sell off the dSLR stuff and get a second hand M8, as prices were becoming more affordable.

In hindsight my extrapolation wasn't quite right. I've finally got to a point were I appreciate the M8 for what it is and have started to enjoy using it. This is coming after a period of nearly selling it in frustration or cursing it for not doing what I expect of it (new battery and SD card since then has sorted it). However more so I appreciate the strengths of a well made dSLR!

Message from my rant: by all means for personal enjoyment consider a digital Leica. Don't rule out an M8, especially now that prices are dropping. However don't expect it to replicate your experience of your M6. Also you would want to be very brave or very foolhardy to rely on it for critical work (though I am sure many do and do so well).

Maybe rent one for a weekend or borrow one if you know somebody with one.

 

[clayne]

Or just stick with what you have, shoot PanF, FP-4, HP-5, Tri-X, Portra, Provia, etc. and minimize costs by doing your own processing. You get to retain everything you have now, learn new ways to do something, and be less dependent on consumer electronics companies spoon-feeding you planned obsolescence.

Quite simply you just don't need anything new.

 

[swoop]

If you want to be a photographer your choices of camera are endless. If you want to use a digital rangefinder you only have a few options, and they're costly. It would be great if Leica's were cheaper. I also wish Land Rover's cost half as much as they do and mortgages too. But things cost what they cost and I try to convey that when clients hire me as well.

I'm not going to get into the capitalism spiel that always comes up when someone complains about the price of a Leica, but if Leica's were cheaper, they really wouldn't be as well regarded as they are. I think $5,000-$6,000, would be a fair price. But $7k isn't as obscene as $30,000-$40,000 Hasselblad asks for their products. And if you are truly a professional, you really can justify the argument that the money spent is an investment. It doesn't really matter to clients, but it matters to me that I use a Leica. I have more experience with it than any other camera design and that carries over into my work. It inspires confidence in my abilities and predictable and reproducible results.

I've also had my M8 for roughly three years, followed by my M9 for about four years. Spread the cost out over that time and the price doesn't seem so bad. I've said this before but the big difference between film and digital is that with film you're paying for each exposure over time and with digital all those costs are paid upfront.

 

[taemo]

what makes the M6 work well for you OP?
Is it the size, manual focus or manual shutter/aperture mode?

I personally shoot with my M6 pre-focused at 7ft 90% of the time with my 50 ZM and it's fantastic but I also have a X100s when I want to shoot digital.

you already have a X100, it may not shoot like a RF but it has the spirit of a rangefinder, what makes it not work for you?
I know that the MF mode on the X100 is painful and even the AF can be slow but TBH when I'm using my X100s, I always use AF and I only shoot center-focusing. occasionally I may scale-focus.