alan davus
Well-known
I bought my first Leica 3 years ago, a M6ttl (brand new.) My only regret since is I didn't get a Leica 35 years ago when I first got into photography. Am I happy, bloody oath.
chief
Newbie
I'm not a long time Leica user but I'm perfectly happy with my new camera, all my SLR&DSLR stuff sets aside. The only thing I regret is that I did not discover Leica before
thomasw_
Well-known
maddoc
... likes film again.
A camera that has been manufactured almost unchanged for over 50 years can`t be that bad ...
mh2000
Well-known
FWIW I really like my IIIc and R4.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
They are good photographic tools and excel when used within their core competencies. As I think others have noted, a "poll" like this may not measure anything other than users' satisfaction with their own choices. There is a lot of nuance lost. In my own case, I have very much enjoyed every camera that I have ever owned with one exception: the original Canon digi-Rebel. Why? I couldn't reliably focus my manual focus lenses with it. This was, of course, not in the design specs, really. It just wasn't the tool for me. Sold it. Canon 5D (currently selling as the Nikon D3 serves me better) has been a much better fit.
I have settled down to a couple of M3s and a couple of M6's and a IIIc and CL just for laughs. Would love an MP at some point.
Ben Marks
Edit: I also love my M8. I think many of the camera's "problems" have been magnified by the bull-horn of the Internet where negative comments tend to have more staying power than positive ones, for whatever reason. I would get the M9 in heartbeat if it were a couple of thousand dollars cheaper. When Leica went to $7,000 they went over the line for me in terms of price. Maybe in a couple of years used ones will appear closer to my price point, or an M10 will appear and M9's will start popping up.
I have settled down to a couple of M3s and a couple of M6's and a IIIc and CL just for laughs. Would love an MP at some point.
Ben Marks
Edit: I also love my M8. I think many of the camera's "problems" have been magnified by the bull-horn of the Internet where negative comments tend to have more staying power than positive ones, for whatever reason. I would get the M9 in heartbeat if it were a couple of thousand dollars cheaper. When Leica went to $7,000 they went over the line for me in terms of price. Maybe in a couple of years used ones will appear closer to my price point, or an M10 will appear and M9's will start popping up.
Last edited:
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
I like my IIIf and my M6. I can imagine buying other used Leicas-- maybe an M3, or M5 or Leica I. But nothing digital.
Richard Marks
Rexel
Most of the posters here I guess have second (or third hand) film M's and these have prbobably been made a few years ago. Absolutely no complaints here. But it is history. An M3 from 1967 does not owe any one anything.
The real question is are we happy with our dealings with leica in terms of product support for current digital products.That might be a bit different.
Richard
The real question is are we happy with our dealings with leica in terms of product support for current digital products.That might be a bit different.
Richard
mojobebop
Well-known
m7
m7
m7...amazing.
m7
m7...amazing.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
If you're a perfectionist, there's always room for improvement. But if one suffers from astigmatism, everything is always not looking like that one thing you saw the other day.
The whole X vs. Z bumper-sticker philosophy is another matter entirely
The whole X vs. Z bumper-sticker philosophy is another matter entirely
degruyl
Just this guy, you know?
Much happier with the Leica M6 than any other camera I have ever owned. Of course, I do have a camera I prefer to take pictures with... but it seems to often have "issues".
Chris101
summicronia
I agree with others who have posted here. As a minimally intrusive film camera the Leica is unsurpassed. Digital cameras however demand a sophistication I do not perceive in the M8/9 cameras with respect to performance or convenience.
The sensor size of the M9 is great, but it could be orders of magnitude more sensitive to light, the LCD could be much larger, and live view - why doesn't it have that? Come to think of it, there are a lot of Leica traditions that work for film, but not for digital.
I find that I shoot digital pictures completely differently than I do film pictures. And for different reasons.
The sensor size of the M9 is great, but it could be orders of magnitude more sensitive to light, the LCD could be much larger, and live view - why doesn't it have that? Come to think of it, there are a lot of Leica traditions that work for film, but not for digital.
I find that I shoot digital pictures completely differently than I do film pictures. And for different reasons.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Chris,
One order of magnitude: ISO 2,500 > ISO 25,000
Two orders: ISO 2,500 > ISO 250,000
I'm not entirely sure how live view works but as far as I am aware there are two possibilities: 'grabbing' the actual photograph from an ever-on sensor or using a conventional shutter/mirror and diverting the live view from somewhere else in the light path. The latter is obviously infeasible with a Leica. I do not know why (or indeed whether) the former is infeasible but I suspect it may have something to do with battery life, heat dissipation and a large sensor. But equally, there must be some reason why Leica chose a convenional shutter rather than electronic.
Or, of course, Leica may simply reckon that few Leica users care about live view, so why bother to provide it? Yes, there are times when it's useful, but then, there are times when a waist-level finder is useful, so why isn't the Leica a TLR?
Don't get me wrong. I hold no brief for excluding features that could be added without undue penalty in battery life, camera price or of course destroying the very nature of an M-series Leica (autofocus, for example). But I suspect that quite a lot of the things people beg for are actually infeasible; and that in any case, what people say they want, and what they buy (or indeed can afford) are not always in one-to-one correspondence.
Cheers,
R.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Live view is impossible with a large CCD sensor because of heat dissispation. A shutter is always needed to "empty" the photosites. Leica would need a CMos sensor or a beamsplitter for a separate sensor to offer liveview.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
climbing_vine
Well-known
Both of these are certainly true in certain contexts, but absolutely false as universals (which is how you've stated them).
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I am very happy with their lenses and enlargers not much with the bodys. They seem to arrive always late on every new technology (except 135 format of course!), have incredibly high price but their cameras have been the only ones which broked on me in several occasions (my most modern one is from the mid 70's but from what I read their more recent models suffer the same problems). I think that if they produced their lenses in the two or three popular (D)SLR mounts they would sell much more and I would not hesitate to sell half of my gear just to get a new set of their lenses.
GLF
GLF
Ming Rider
Film, the next evolution.
Thanks for all your votes so far.
What's apparent up to now is that the majority of voters are happy with their cameras and Leica as a whole, which includes myself, though I've only been a Leicaphile for 3 years and have never had to use customer services.
What is also significant is that an incredible 1/4 of voters believe that things could be better and a not inconsiderable number are totally dissatisfied.
Had these results been on a dedicated Leica forum, I could imagine that said members would have been hunted down and burnt at the stake by now. But come to think of it, they wouldn't be on a Leica forum in the first place.
In summary, I would say that Leica have and continue to get an unfairly bad press on the net. As has been mentioned before in this thread, the negative opinions tend to out grow the positive.
What's apparent up to now is that the majority of voters are happy with their cameras and Leica as a whole, which includes myself, though I've only been a Leicaphile for 3 years and have never had to use customer services.
What is also significant is that an incredible 1/4 of voters believe that things could be better and a not inconsiderable number are totally dissatisfied.
Had these results been on a dedicated Leica forum, I could imagine that said members would have been hunted down and burnt at the stake by now. But come to think of it, they wouldn't be on a Leica forum in the first place.
In summary, I would say that Leica have and continue to get an unfairly bad press on the net. As has been mentioned before in this thread, the negative opinions tend to out grow the positive.
degruyl
Just this guy, you know?
Possibly because people who have problems like to complain? Or at least ask about solutions.
I think there are some things to be careful of with respect to Leica Ms (burning the shutter, for instance) but they hold up quite well. If there is a mechanical issue, someone can usually fix it. Perhaps not in as timely a manner as you would like, but eventually (at least with film cameras - I have no knowledge of digital leicas).
Many camera companies max out support after a couple or five years. Leica appears to have parts around for a while. Or at least someone has them. That is something, at the very least.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I'm one of them. And Leica agrees with me. Any company that can't see any room for improvement is in serious trouble. That doesn't mean they're bad. It just means they aren't perfect.
Cheers,
R.