Should i remain a Leica virgin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ChrisN said:
Steer clear of the Barnacks unless you have good eyesight. With glasses those squinty viewfinders are disappointing (and they'll scratch your expensive spectacles).

Other than that - do what feels right for you.
Click to expand...

And my current GAS is cured instantly. Thanks Chris. I'll eat this month after all.
 
Personally, my pulse rises more for a Contax or a Nikon than a Leica, but I do love art deco styling, which probably has a lot to do with it. I forgave my Kiev its quirks for being so classy looking.

But the quality of the engineering in a Leica is a wondrous thing.
 
MISH said:
I lost my virginity in 1990 and I still can't get the smile off my face.
I don't know where you live but my advice would be to find someone like me in your area that has already been devirginized. in general we are a friendly bunch that likes nothing better than talking about and showing our cameras to anyone that shows even the slightest interest. This will give you a chance to see if the system suits you.

My advice #2) If you find this is something you want to go for.....forget about the young flashy expensive model, go for the awkward hard to use mature older sister. It is harder to get her loaded (another place a mentor can come in handy) but if you find one that has a lot of life left in it can be a ton of fun for a small investment. The lens selection for a Barnack is unbelievable with so many good ones to try. I agree with Roger when he says that pretty much any lens for a Leica is better than my ability as a photographer so don't discount the ones that don't say Leica on them.

when people that know something about cameras see mine the inevitable question seems to be "does that thing make better pictures" ...... my answer "no, but it does make me take different pictures"

have fun on your journey
Click to expand...

If a really old Barnack type camera isn't your cup of tea, you can get a nice used M camera and lens for a song. Look through the classified postings of this website - there are more than a few nice, used M bodies that can be yours for $700-1000ish. Same thing with lenses - I have seen clean used 50/2.8 Elmar M lenses offered for $500-600 and the 28/2.8 Elmarit M lens for $900-1000. Al you have to do is do a bit of shopping.

The stereotype of Leica cameras and lenses that you have to be willing to cough up somewhere between $12,000 and $15,000 to own one Leica camera and lens just doesn't hold water. If you insist on a new digital M or M-Monochrom and a new 50 Summilux ASPH or Leica APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2.0 ASPH, then yes- that is indeed the case - but there are affordable options that will put a Leica around your neck for thousands less.

JMHO but I say leave the top shelf digital M and mega-dollar lens setups. There is a treasure trove of outstanding film M cameras that are looking for new homes.
 
"Should I remain a Leica virgin?" embues the brand with more weight and importance, emotional clout, than it ought to.

A Leica M or Barnack is a camera. A very nice one, a very expensive one, but ultimately and specifically just a camera. Do you want to try using a Leica M? Do it. Are you unsure because of the money involved? Never buy anything that you can't pay cash for, and if that's a stretch, buy something more affordable that does the job.

I got into using and owning Leica cameras from two directions. One was my father, who had a IIIf that he treated like a sacred object. Curiosity got me there. The other was the grizzled old salesman at that shop in Manhattan (LOL! he was probably younger than I am now ... :) who got tired of me hanging about the shop after school and ogling all the dusty old gear in the cabinets.

"Hey kid, you ever gonna buy anything?"
"I don't have much money ..."
"How much you got?"
"A hunnert dollars."
"Here..." he placed beaten up IIf and IIc on the counter, one fitted with an Elmar 3.5cm and the other with an Elmar 5.0cm. "Nobody wants this old junk anymore, real photographers use Nikons." (1969 ... a Nikon F Photomic FTn was $430 body only, WAY more than I could even imagine having.)​

So I got into Leica because they were cheap and because my father had one. I'd say it took me the next thirty years of doing photography with them, the Nikon F (yes, I did get one but that's another story...) and a bunch of other equipment of all types, to see why the Leica was special.

And I still see it today, even with Voigtländer and Zeiss lenses, every time I use the M for a while and then go off and use my other cameras for a bit.

But ... all that said, in the end it's just a camera, just another tool for a photographer's eye. In 2002, I sold my entire Leica kit to fund the purchase of a Hasselblad 903SWC. That's my sacred object in camera equipment ... I loved the damn thing. But I loved it too much to the point of not wanting to damage it and didn't use it very much. I sold it in 2004 to fund my need for more and better digital equipment, which did me very well. (I've acquired another SWC now, an older one, which I don't hold as sacred as the 903SWC but which I'm much much happier using... :)

Don't get sucked into the "Leica virgin" business. If you have the money, buy yourself an M and a lens or two, and make photos with it. If you love it and use it, keep it. If not, sell it and move on. Remember, you can always buy another one if you find that you miss it.

It's the photographs that matter, not the equipment.

G
 
I agree that Leica is given a demi-God status that no camera, or indeed any physical object can really deserve.

They are just cameras, but as far as cameras go, there is a 'specialness' about them, for me at least. Leicas are not my favourite cameras, but it's as clear as day to me why they would be somebody else's.
 
Godfrey said:
"Should I remain a Leica virgin?" embues the brand with more weight and importance, emotional clout, than it ought to. . .
Click to expand...
With the indulgence of the court, m'lud, I would suggest that the plaintiff was making a jocular reference to a popular song by a Miss Ciccone.

Cheers,

R.
 
rohankent said:
I've been posting regularly in the gallery, but not much in threads.

Here's a sample of the three lenses I've been using (the 105mm is my favorite, but not always appropriate).
Click to expand...
DANG! You're a real fine shooter! Don't change ANYTHING. Don't buy anything. No, wait. Maybe wet printing? That's a bit of a challenge, but there's nothing quite likle a gelatin silver print at, say, 11x14". Also, off-camera flash is a great skill to have. It may even be automatic with the FE.
 
thegman said:
I agree that Leica is given a demi-God status that no camera, or indeed any physical object can really deserve.

They are just cameras, but as far as cameras go, there is a 'specialness' about them, for me at least. Leicas are not my favourite cameras, but it's as clear as day to me why they would be somebody else's.
Click to expand...


Give me a break...every member on that Nikon____ site thinks Nikon is God. Canon forums the same way. And many on RFF think their brand is God, or at least sitting at the right hand.:p

Time to stop shooting barbs at Leica because some don't like the brand, the RF, the price or whatever. I use what I love. Leica cameras. If others like other brands, fine with me...you won't find me giving anyone a hard time about their choice of gear, so I expect the same. It is this Leica target shooting that I hate about RFF.

If the OP wants to keep shooting Nikons, great! If he wants a Leica, great! I shot nothing BUT Nikon until 2007, now there is no going back except for the nostalgic good feelings I get when I pick up the FE2. Just my own preference.
 
Godfrey said:
Who the heck is she? And what does she have to do with Leica virginity?

G
Click to expand...
M'lud, I apologize for my lack of clarity. Using what is widely known as a "search engine" (such as the proprietary Google), the words "Like A Virgin" and "Ciccone" will lead to a popular singer who had what is popularly called a "hit" called "Like A Virgin" under the stage name of "Madonna".

Cheers,

R.
 
Using what is widely known as a "search engine" (such as the proprietary Google), the words "Like A Virgin" and "Ciccone" will lead to a popular singer who had what is popularly called a "hit" called "Like A Virgin" under the stage name of "Madonna".



Or you could just click on the link in post #29 in this thread. ;)
 
Roger Hicks said:
M'lud, I apologize for my lack of clarity. Using what is widely known as a "search engine" (such as the proprietary Google), the words "Like A Virgin" and "Ciccone" will lead to a popular singer who had what is popularly called a "hit" called "Like A Virgin" under the stage name of "Madonna".

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Listen Falstaff: I don't agree.
 
rohankent said:
Given its 2013, given I've never experienced shooting a Leica or even held one, given I have limited financial means, given I really enjoy film photography, given many of the photographers I enjoy use Leica, given I'm 40 and feel like its now or never (in more than one area of life)... Should I remain a Leica virgin or have a mid-life affair with one?

Some background. In September of last year, on my 40th birthday, i picked up my Father's Nikon FE with 50/1.4 and out of nowhere became a bit obsessed with photography. I'm midway through a year long project, to shoot at least a roll of black and white film per week on that camera. I enjoy working within self imposed limitations like this. I've added a couple of lenses to his kit (105/2.5 and 35/2.8 ), but kept things pretty simple.

I've started to think about the parameters for next years project. I wouldn't mind experiencing a different kind of camera. I could go for a TLR or Hasselblad, but would have to put money into another scanner (my Plustek is only 35mm). So, in terms of 35mm, there is only really the rangefinder world, or maybe XPan.

If I were able to scrounge up $1,000-$1,500, I might be able to buy an M6 and a VC 35/1.4, or an M3 and 50mm of some description. Any rangefinder is going to provide a different experience of photography compare to my FE, but if I can only afford VC glass, is it going to be any better than the good Nikkor AIS glass?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I always tell people go ahead and get a Leica you can always sell it for basically what you have in it. You really have little to lose.
 
dave lackey said:
Time to stop shooting barbs at Leica because some don't like the brand, the RF, the price or whatever. I use what I love. Leica cameras. If others like other brands, fine with me...you won't find me giving anyone a hard time about their choice of gear, so I expect the same. It is this Leica target shooting that I hate about RFF..
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure why this was in reply to my post, I was not shooting barbs at Leica, I *do* love Leica cameras, the only reason I don't use them any more is that they are 35mm, not medium format.

Perhaps saying that they are not my favourite was misleading, they are not my favourite, but they are very close to it! When I said 'not my favourite' I should have said, 'not quite my favourite'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom