Although I love Leica equipment, I'm not so sure I generally like quintessential 'Leica' things. A few years ago someone submitted a photo to one of the Leica mailing lists, asking if the readers didn't agree with him that it defined what Leica photography looked like in the 1950s. He seemed really proud of the photo, which he had taken. It was an extremely grainy shot of a drunk woman at a party, sans shoes (if I recall correctly) and about to spill her martini. Ugh! She would make even the prospect of a night of sin rather unappealing.
My first introduction to Leica photography was the 35mm Kodachromes in the National Geographic, back when I was a kid. At that time the photos were captioned with the make of camera and the film. Anyhow, these were supposed to be the best that 35mm photography had to offer. Extrapolating to today, I would look to modern Leica lens offerings as being the most Leica-like. However, I would qualify this somewhat. For many of us it is not necessary to have the most recent lens in order to enjoy ultimate quality, since we do not generally use our equipment in the extreme situations in which the latest technology would be an obvious advantage. In fact, I get along quite well with 35mm Summarons, recent 50mm Elmars, and such like, since I do not use these lenses at maximum apertures (except very rarely).
I am not, however, overly fond of the low contrast 'classic' look, which as often as not is due to haze or some other lens abnormality.
