That old thing about Leicas being stealthy...

[dll927]

All this is about Leicas. Why not use a Zorki? Looks just the same, at least up to the M series. Wonder if it would draw so much attention.

I'm assuming you all know what a Zorki is!!

 

[Peter S]

Funny discussion. I always thought that it was the behaviour of the shooter that makes him/her conspicuous not the equipment (maybe with the exception of big DSLR howitsers). Just pretend as if you have every right being there doing what you are doing and you will soon see less people are noticing you. If you are nervous or acting strangely that is when people notice you, go with the flow and be relaxed. Much more important than taping your camera which to me seems a very silly thing to do, but to each his own.

 

[rbsinto]

I think it is thephotographers technique rather thanhis or her gear that makes them stealthy, regardless of the brand name on the body and/or lens.

 

[Mackinaw]

I've been doing a lot of street photography as of late. Yesterday I used my M3 and it was like I was invisible as I walked down a crowded street, nobody even noticed me. The previous weekend I took along my Mamiya C220 TLR and was stopped by several people who wanted to talk to me about my cool, old camera. So the choice of camera can matter when it come to "stealthness."

Jim B.

 

[ironhorse]

I think it is thephotographers technique rather thanhis or her gear that makes them stealthy, regardless of the brand name on the body and/or lens.

Bruce Gilden, for example? 😀

 

[John Rountree]

If you want to be invisible when you are shooting on the street you should start with three shots of good tequila.
I am certain that I am less noticeable when I shoot my M7 w/40mm Rokkor than I was when I walked around with my Canon 1N w/35mm f1.4 "L" lens.

 

[Pherdinand]

why would you want to be "invisible", anyway?
edit: see my eye contact eye in my signature

 

[anorphirith]

what you need is an M9-P 🙂

 

[menos]

I really don't know where people are doing their stealth shooting to be so concerned with shutter sound. Churches? Libraries?

On the loud streets of any major city, there is zero practical difference between a DSLR and a Leica in terms of shutter sound.

I have a very different opinion about that.
I feel, that I do get closer to my subjects with a more silent rangefinder, than with the loud (and big) SLRs, I used to use.
All done with Leica M cameras, mostly with fast lenses during the nights, that's, what I prefer.
I like, not to interfere with my scenes - a less noisy camera helps, while cloth shuttered Ms are still king - the new digital one's are not bad either (I use a M8.2 and M9 with discreet shutter setting, moving the camera away from direct audibility in between frames).

"man loves dog loves man" | 50/1 on flickr

"chinese chess" | 35/1.4 on flickr

"married ?" | 50/1 on flickr

"…" | 50/1 on flickr

"bike mechanic" | 35/1.4 on flickr

 

[Colin Corneau]

Something to consider:
I shoot for a (smallish) newspaper, and often photograph people in various situations. More often than not, a big DSLR with anything other than a small 50 on it is pretty intimidating to them...I see it all the time, it's not hard to discern.

A small rangefinder is a lot more gentle, that way.

I guess modern DSLRs are pretty amazing, technically, but that really boils down to what works well for ME, not my subject.

All about your priorities, I suppose.

 

[JohnTF]

Jiriho z Podebrad, then? The open square with the large, blocky, rather ugly modern church in it?

Right, large clock? Just head up hill on the right to find Husa, the Argentinean Fillets are something else, and the cheese plate, you need help to finish off the appetizers.

I spent a nice month between there and Flora?

Regards, John

 

[wafflecakee]

If you want to be invisible when you are shooting on the street you should start with three shots of good tequila.
I am certain that I am less noticeable when I shoot my M7 w/40mm Rokkor than I was when I walked around with my Canon 1N w/35mm f1.4 "L" lens.

The best street shots I have taken were while under the influence. liquid courage i suppose...

 

[JohnTF]

FotoSkoda... do NOT get me started on FotoSkoda, please. A dangerous, dangerous place. I've already bought three lenses from them this holiday (15 Super-Wide Heliar, 50 1.5 Nokton and one of those Soviet 35mm Biogon jobs) and I am seriously in lust over a Leica Standard that they have sitting in a glass-case, looking lonely. Black, with the right amount of brass shining through... minimalist photography taken to the extreme; my 50 Heliar 3.5 would look good on it methinks. As for beer, I am working down the list. It's a long list, alas. I'm in an apartment in Zizkov, will pop over the hill to Vinohrady one of these days and try that steak!

They should have given you your Gold card, 10% even on used now. Even some of the NFS items in the owner's personal collection on display are possible to buy if you ask.

I think a black Standard was my first really lovely Leica. The leather, or whatever they put on in those days, was often loose, I have one in real need of a new cover. I think they can be really good shooters, I have another that was converted with a RF, making it a II with a very low number.

Do not overlook Pazdera, but as I said, the son is more likely to deal. They also sometimes make some errors and price some cameras low. Igor came to visit, and his first email upon returning was "any thing new at the shops?" My good friend Lukas I believe left Foto Skoda, I was hoping he would be the new buyer. I saw them pay $200 to a little old lady for a totally mint black II. Both places have a lot on consignment. Pazdera closes in August normally.

John

 

[Cagliostro73]

I think it's a matter of "difference".
I live in Rome and every time I go around for shooting it's full of tourists with something hanging on: a reflex, a EVIL, a compact... you name it.
I've noticed that experienced photog simply detect leica and they look at them with a desire glance. So much that often I smile, I cover my leica M2 with my hand and I say "MINE!". They walk over laughing!
But the point is: the same thing happens with my fed3 and my kiev 2a. I suppose because they are "different", they look "retro" and so they catch people curiosity.
Anyway I cannot approach people with my nikon D300 and 24-70 2.8 the same way i can with my M2 with 85mm J9. I think it's less "intrusive" and "bulky" than the DSLR. Again: more than a matter of "stealth" it's a matter of "difference" 🙂
Are leicas (and RF in general) deviant? 🙂

 

[StaaleS]

I think a black Standard was my first really lovely Leica. The leather, or whatever they put on in those days, was often loose, I have one in real need of a new cover. I think they can be really good shooters, I have another that was converted with a RF, making it a II with a very low number.

Well, I bought the Standard yesterday... serial number 16,600, which would make it a 1929 vintage according to our esteemed host, a Leica IC as far as I can tell, converted a to Standard at some point. A relative steal at 6700 kc I think! And, a propos the actual subject of this thread: A black Standard is not stealthy. Turns heads, it does. Maybe if I mount the 50/1.5 Nokton it will look like a Sony Nex and be ignored???

I'll look into the other shop. Bought some old green, orange, yellow filters there last summer which fit my Summar. Was looking for 50mm viewfinder then but this was not to be had anywhere.

 

[alistair.o]

Err ... relatively?

Is the guy in the middle saying "I miss the old Vietnam days, you know" 😀

 

[alistair.o]

I like, not to interfere with my scenes...

I agree with the intent but, when you have come upon a scene/situation, isn't it you i.e. the photographer who has to be quietly about your work? You take the picture and if then you are noticed, so what? Either stay and build a 'rapport' or move on. The camera, per se, has little to do with it.

 

[Sparrow]

Is the guy in the middle saying "I miss the old Vietnam days, you know" 😀

Colonel Markey? I love the sound of Nikons in the morning ... sounds like imagery ....

 

[menos]

I like, not to interfere with my scenes...

I agree with the intent but, when you have come upon a scene/situation, isn't it you i.e. the photographer who has to be quietly about your work? You take the picture and if then you are noticed, so what? Either stay and build a 'rapport' or move on. The camera, per se, has little to do with it.

Absolutely!
The camera's noise and appearance has the smallest bit to do with how much a photographer influences the scene - the photographer probably the most.
Nevertheless, do I firmly believe, that I do take different images with the rangefinder (Leica or else doesn't matter for this respect) than with a big SLR.

@Sparrow, I do like, how the gold jewelry of the Nikon shooter resembles his yellow stitched/flocked neck straps ;-)

 

[Roger Hicks]

Oh, I'm not changing. I just wanted to challenge this bizarre conventional wisdom -- I've seen it appear recently again with the introduction of the M9-P.

In fact, I'll go further: many of my favorite reportage shots, going back to HCB and right to the present, are not necessarily the result from a stealthy, I-am-invisible photographer. Many have the subject(s) looking at the camera oddly at the moment they are being photographed. Many are depictions of strife and war where the subjects are, you know, otherwise preoccupied. It's next to impossible to get a street-type "daily life" shot where you are close enough to the subject for a proper comp and yet they are unaware of being photographed. Many of them are, of course, but I mention this to further the discussion.

I know that these cameras are certainly more discreet than SLRs of any type. But I maintain that the supposed clandestine nature of the M or RFs in general is wildly overstated.

Dear Ted,

Yet another "Absolutely!" They are quieter, it's true, but that's about all.

Personally, I loathe the term 'stealth', because it implies sneaking and thieving. 'Unobtrusive' is better, but, as you say, cameras (as compared with camera 'phones) aren't unobtrusive either. Only the photographer can be unobtrusive.

Unlike the witless baggage I saw last week (in Arles, at a vernissage)with a monster Nikon SLR and fat zoom, lens hood carefully mounted backwards. Rather then cross her line of sight I waited for her to shoot, but after she had spent several interminable seconds fiddling with her overgrown point-and-shoot, I just gave up and walked on. Predictably, she chose that moment to shooot and flashed me a look of pure hatred. About as far from unobtrusive as you can get!

Incidentally, I'm not being sexist. Many men are as bad, sometimes worse. It's just that this was the most recent and flagrant example.

Cheers,

R.