Leica LTM Looking at a Leica II. Any reasons not to get it?

[NLewis]

I second the opinion that you might dump that fiddly lens and get a classic nickel elmar 50/3.5. Leica II is way cool, really dials in the "barnack" essence with no low-speed dial. You don't need it if you are shooting handheld anyway, and who shoots a Barnack on a tripod?

 

[Pirate]

Why go with a 3.5 when I have the F2 already? I'll stick with this little Summitar, I like it.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Nothing is the matter with a Summitar except it is larger and it makes pictures that look too good and modern. A 1930s Elmar with some haze and marks will make pictures with a lot of character reflective of using such an old camera. And I think they are joys because they collapse almost flat on the body, which is really the key to the whole Leica Screwmount experience IMHO. Once you go adding other than 50mm lenses and viewfinders and all the other doo-dads then you might as well shoot anything.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Just out of curiosity, Roger, what would persuade you to put a roll through your Ultra Fex? On my long list of things to do that I'll never actually get round to doing is roll my own and use mine... but then I'm a masochist!

Adrian

Dear Adrian,

Given that I've never successfully re-rolled 120 onto 620, and the Ultra Fex won't take 120, probably nothing would persuade me except perhaps 10-20 rolls of 620. Why 10-20 rolls? Because there are several other 620 cameras that Frances and I would try before the Ultra Fex, including her Art Deco Kodak.

Cheers,

R.

 

[maddoc]

Damn ... I paid $190.00 for my black Leica ll on eBay a few years ago. It's a nice camera but I wouldn't be paying $500.00 or more for one! 😱

... since I was an absolute RF newbe then, I missed that chance ... 😱

 

[Luddite Frank]

I would have thought if it were fixable that Sherry would have fixed it with her CLA. She sold it to a friend of mine for a very good price so I don't think there was any extra effort put into this lens. Youxin is the one that checked it out and told me about it, so I'm liking the idea of the Leica II as a permanent fix for it.

Hmmm....Still kind of sounds like trying to play guitar with a couple of the strings out of tune, and altering where your fingers hit the fret-board to make the music sound right.... 😉


But... let us know know what you find, and share some pics if you can !


Good luck !

😎

 

[Muggins]

Dear Adrian,

Given that I've never successfully re-rolled 120 onto 620, and the Ultra Fex won't take 120, probably nothing would persuade me except perhaps 10-20 rolls of 620. Why 10-20 rolls? Because there are several other 620 cameras that Frances and I would try before the Ultra Fex, including her Art Deco Kodak.

One roll I might respool (as I said, I'm a masochist!) and send you, but ten is just too masochistic even for me! My Ultra Fex is second in the queue, behind a Hawkeye that just needs a 620 take-up spool, so I don't have that problem. Frances' Kodak is really rather lovely, isn't it (Shutterbug)?

S'pose I'd better mention Leicas, just to keep us on-topic!

Adrian

 

[traveler_101]

Why Not...though it is ADDICTIVE
There is something Tres Special about barnacks
so easy to shoot , tres retro sex appeal
Everyone will stop and chat with You Intrigued ...

You are seducing me on behalf of the camera Helen, but one thing puzzles me: "so easy to shoot"--really? I would have thought the opposite.

It's the simplicity of the Leica ll that I like. No low speed mechanism to gum up and no erratic 1/1000 shutter speed to worry about. I also like the distinct separation of the rangefinder and viewfinder windows!

Simplicity is all well and good, but what is appealing about the separate RF and VF windows?

 

[Pirate]

I would think a clear viewing window, not seeing framelines would be nice.

 

[Keith]

You are seducing me on behalf of the camera Helen, but one thing puzzles me: "so easy to shoot"--really? I would have thought the opposite.



Simplicity is all well and good, but what is appealing about the separate RF and VF windows?

When I say appealing I really mean preferable to the arrangement of the later cameras with the dual eye piece where the two are very close together. I actually prefer the definite separation and I aso like the look of the small round windows.

I think a Barnack is a camera that has a level of tactility that is unique ... the method of advance with the winding knob is really nice as well IMO.

They are just a jewel of a camera and they're so small that you basically hold and operate them them with your fingertips ... I find them more comfortable than an M!

 

[barnwulf]

I bought a Leica II about 6 months ago after I saw a picture of Keith's II. I loved the clean look. Don Goldberg has it now but I hope to see it soon as I have picked up a beautiful Summar to put on it. Jim

 

[xayraa33]

Get it.
You like it then get it.
If you change your mind after awhile you can always sell it here on RFF.

 

[Todd Frederick]

If you are a collector, have lots of money to spend (especially on repairs and restoration that will be needed), and want to sit and look at a piece of history, then buy the camera.

If you want a good film camera to take good photos and pay a reasonable price, then look for something else.

You said in your first sentence: "Looking at a Leica II." What Leica II are you looking at and what's the price? I'd like to take a look too.

That's just my opinion.

 

[Keith]

If you are a collector, have lots of money to spend (especially on repairs and restoration that will be needed), and want to sit and look at a piece of history, then buy the camera.

If you want a good film camera to take good photos and pay a reasonable price, then look for something else.

You said in your first sentence: "Looking at a Leica II." What Leica II are you looking at and what's the price? I'd like to take a look too.

That's just my opinion.

From memory a CLA with Youxin cost me $80.00 when I realised my Leica ll shutter was sluggish ... even adding a new beam spitter to these things is very cheap.

I bought a very dirty ugly lllf from ebay that looked like it had been stored undergound ... a full CLA with a replacement curtain cost me $140.00 and the camera came backing looking immaculate.

 

[Pirate]

I don't want to tell you where it is because you might buy it out from under me 😀

I'll show you pictures after I get it...

 

[Frank Petronio]

haha no never ;-)

The real ruse to use is to create one of these camera-lust threads with everyone telling each other how great a Leica II is (or a Canon A1 or a Pentax XXX or .....) and then quietly list yours with a slightly higher than average Buy It Now price.

People do it with Summiluxes and Noctiluxes all the time I see.

~

A Leica LTM camera has a different pace of shooting than other cameras... with an M you can keep the camera to your eye while winding, but when I shoot a LTM I need to pull it away for a second to wind. Then I refocus wide-open portraits and it takes 4-5 seconds between shots... versus 1 second for a M, an 1/8 of a second of a second for a modern DSLR, or 20 seconds for a 4x5.

 

[Pirate]

I had a 1952 Canon III, which was a copy of a Leica III. I let it go last month and I've been kicking my self for it ever since. It was just the coolest and nicest camera. I know in the back of my mind I'm trying to replace that camera.

And I never thought about that selling one for a higher price .... that's a funny way to do it, but it sounds clever.

 

[Todd Frederick]

I used a III and a IIIC for years and loved them. The prices on good ones seem to be rising beyond my budget, but if you can find one in good condition at a reasonable price, go for it. I'd love to see what you get.

If you just want to take good quality photos with a small 35mm camera there are other options. On the RFF classifieds there is a nice Olympus OM-1n for sale with lens for $60 (the meter doesn't work but the Leica II doesn't even have a meter).

That was the only point I was trying to make. I'd love to have another LTM also.