The agony of choice

[Ronald_H]

Oh yes, I know perfectly well what I want. But making a choice? Damn difficult.

I want a compact 35mm RF M-mount camera with interchangable lenses. My lenses will be 28-50-90mm. These lenses need to be FAST. A longish EBL is preferred, as to be able to focus something like a 90mm f1.8 accurately. I want (also) to shoot concerts with it, so a combined RF/VF is a must. A built in meter would be convenient, but I could live without it. I do not need motor capability, AE or TTL flash. Unfortunately I can afford a lot, fortunately I can show restraint.

Please do not insult me by insisting that an SLR would be better for concert shooting. I have plenty, digital and analogue. An RF would just be a nice inconspicious low profile alternative for when I get close.


So the best choices:

1. Zeiss Ikon. Long EBL. Not Leicaish expensive. Convenience of AE although I'd rather have a metered manual camera. Basically a 'tarted up' Bessa (I'll take that as a plus). No cred and it's fugly though.

2. Leica M3. Long EBL, Leica mystique. Will hold its value because of this. External VF needed for 28mm. No meter. Very old, no clue how to be sure to get a good user that does not need CLA soon.

3. Leica M2. Simple elegance. Leica mystique. External VF needed for 28mm. No meter. Very old.

4. Leica M4-2. Capable but unloved, therefore cheaper. Less old, still no meter.

5. CV Bessa R2M. 'Low end' but capable. Inexpensive. EBL probably too short.

6. Leica M6 Classic: Capable. Has a meter. Still quite expensive.

7. Leica M4. Capable but I'd rather spend the money on one of the above.

8. Leica M5. Fugly. Fragile metering system. Expensive due to collector demand.


And I haven't even mentioned lenses...


A CV Bessa T is cheap, can focus accurately, but I'll need seperate finders with that. A Kiev does not have an M mount and I don't want to be dependent on Russion QC.

What did I overlook?

 

[mfogiel]

For what you want there's no contest, especially for shooting in low light. Get a black Zeiss Ikon - it is by no means "fugly" and let's you take great pictures. If you need Leica mystique, get one of these famous and expensive lenses - that should be sufficient to dispel your mystique quest ( but the Zeiss lenses are nicer 🙂 ).
I suggest the 28 Summicron, 50 Noctilux and Zeiss 85/2, this will fix your bank account too.

 

[Ronald_H]

I never said I need it, but I AM intrigued by it.

And each to his own, but I do think the ZI looks ugly. Lens discussions are for another thread... but a Noctilux? Nah.

 

[mfunnell]

If I were doing that I'd use two bodies, one with a low-mag (.58x) finder for the 28 and a high mag (.85x, or M3) for the 90, with the 50 usable on either. If you want to spend money, MPs look nice 😀. I'd use my Hexar RF w CV Ultron 28 and my M3 w 75 Summilux (don't have a 90 and love the 'lux) plus one of my 50s (probably the Hexanon) - but I'm "using" what I have, not spending money (which I don't have 🙁 ).

...Mike

 

[Keith]

I like my Ikon and it is a very capable camera for what you describe ... 'fugly' is a little harsh I feel! 😛

My Hexar RF however is not very far behind it but I guess in a concert environment the motordrive could be a little loud. The M2 has the best frameline combination but the M3 has the slightly better viewfinder in the light you will encounter. I don't feel the age of the Leicas is relevant as plenty of people repair them and they are pretty near bullet proof anyway ... the main thing is the finders when selecting an example.

Value for money and low light performance goes to the Ikon by a large margin IMHO!

[edit] ... Leica 'mystique' is a rumour created to keep prices high ... they are just a camera! 😱

 

[Ronald_H]

[edit] ... Leica 'mystique' is a rumour created to keep prices high ... they are just a camera! 😱

I always believed that... and why should a beaten M2 be 14 (fourteen) times the price of a beaten Nikon FM of half its age? Especially when the FM is brassed but perfect and a sheer joy to use?

But still, if you can't understand them, join them as they say 😉

The last few days I have found an M2. M3, M4-2 and an M6 in my price range at local (= in my tiny country) dealers. For the people who recommended multiple new bodies, all well and good, but I will need a new car too one day 😀

Still not decided... in the meantime I will shoot some more with my recently acquired Canonet. But the M4-2 is 'only' 395 euros, that's bearable for 'just' a camera. But to put it into perspective, for that money I can also get a Nikon FM3a for which I already own a bag full of excellent lenses. Choices, choices...

 

[chikne]

Oh man, I am in the exact same situation. Though I am looking for something with a meter....

 

[bmattock]

But still, if you can't understand them, join them as they say 😉

Who says that? I don't say that. In fact, when lemmings start heading for the cliff, I make sure I have a good seat for the show, but I am not tempted to go thundering over the side with them.

I would not spend money on a Leica unless I had both won the lottery and suffered severe head trauma. Others may choose differently, and I would tell them they're wrong - if they believe that there is something special about Leica that justifies the cost to them.

You seem, on the other hand, to likewise suspect the Leica myth is just that - a myth. So how does that jibe with splashing out for one anyway? It's your money and your choice, of course. Just wondering about your reasoning.

 

[Charly]

I'm not sure the M4-2 has lines for 28mm but the M4-P does. The meter on an M6 is basic (ie centre weighted and has 2 arrows in the VF). I always spot metered gigs and crossed my fingers.

My money would be on a ZI. Incidentally, I bought an M4-P recently having compared the two. The reason? Resale value. The ZI is objectively the better camera.

 

[Ronald_H]

You seem, on the other hand, to likewise suspect the Leica myth is just that - a myth. So how does that jibe with splashing out for one anyway? It's your money and your choice, of course. Just wondering about your reasoning.

It's hard to explain really. A friend, who actually IS an excellent photographer (as opposed to a vain idiot with a red dot), has never wanted anything else. The first time I held his M6 I felt it was heavy and awkward. But I still had to cut my photgraphic teeth back then.

I progressed from plastic SLRs to really good plastic SLRs, then jumped ship to digital SLRs. Being an available light shooter got me stuck on primes early on. I do not work commercially, but my (concert) work is frequently used for publications. In other words, I very firmly believe that I know what I am talking about w.r.t. photography.

Recently I got bored with digital and tried my hand at B/W film, started to develop my own. I also got interested in analogue gear again and love working with my old Nikons. I can operate my D200 very fluidly, but I like my FM more. If the pics come out lousy, I cannot blame the automation.

As I work a lot in low light, and also like social and street photography, something smaller than an SLR and without the mirror slap became more and more attractive.

So I bought a Canonet for 20 euros and was very pleasantly surprised. Built in meter, fast and sharp lens, smallish and whisper quiet. That will be able to cover a lot of what I intend to do with a Leica.

But, even after all this, I am still wondering what the fuss is all about. So I'm tempted. And if I do find out it's just a myth... well, Leica gear holds its value, so I can always sell it on. Yes I', almost convinced myself 😀

 

[Ronald_H]

Vic, that's a great article. And yes, I hate to see options go. Pondering what to choose is so much more fun than choosing itself.

 

[bmattock]

But, even after all this, I am still wondering what the fuss is all about. So I'm tempted. And if I do find out it's just a myth... well, Leica gear holds its value, so I can always sell it on. Yes I', almost convinced myself 😀

I think we are somewhat alike. I am quite convinced that Leica makes excellent, even superior, gear. I am unconvinced that it possesses any qualities that would make my photographs intrinsically better in any way I could measure - at least not to the tune of 10 times or more money.

Now, since the Head Bartender has urged us to give each other some long sloppy kisses, let me say this - I am not anti-Leica, and this is not Leica-bashing. I would say the same thing about an IWF wristwatch versus a Casio *if* my goal were to tell time.

On the other hand, if your goal is to 'collect' or to 'have' a Leica - and that gives you pleasure - then of course I'd say go for it.

If your goal is purely getting photographs - and you likewise question the mystique surrounding Leica - then it seems the real question is how much do you want a Leica so that you can have a Leica? I think you're trying to talk yourself into buying a Leica, and if that's the case, I've always been a fan of indulgence. Go for it, have fun, enjoy it. You are right - it will most likely hold value.

But I wonder if the question you are asking is really the question you are asking - if you know what I mean. Not trying to be all psychoanalytic up in here, but there you go.

 

[Tuolumne]

I do alot of theater photography. My favorite digital camera is an R-D1 for this: light, quiet, great M glass available, built-in light meter, high quality "film-like" images. I do like a built-in meter for shooting in the dark - one less item to keep track of, even tho I can almost always guess the right exposure now. (For full-up theater lighting with a dark back ground, ISO 1600, f4@1/250th to keep from blowing highlights.) For film I have used my M5 and my MP3. M5 has a great built-in spot meter and the MP3 has a great view finder and a bult-in LED meter which can be seen in the dark (not so on the M5, which has match needle metering.)

I also sometimes shoot a Mamiya 7II for posed group shots. Great quality with beautiful tonality. I'm not sure there is a "single" right camera for this application.

/T

 

[BillBingham2]

RH,

Get yourself a good bag and two cameras. Both Bessa Ts, black to one add a winder. The non-winder camera gets a black CV metal viewfinder and a CV 28/1.9 chunk of glass. That lens does not come off except for a 15/4.5 you have stashed in the bottom of your bag. You will get a 50/1.5 CV for the winder camera, again with a black brightline metal finder for her. I would recommend that you jump up to a 105/2.5 Nikkor from the 50. I do not think an 85 or a 90 is enough of a jump to make it worth carrying. You will need a brighline finder for it, they are not impossible to find, but that is the only hard part of the entire outfit.

Two cameras back each other up. You will shoot the majority of your stuff on the 28 and 50. Even once in a while the 105. Get a messenger style bag (timbuk2 medium sized classic messenger bag in black/black) and have someone stich together some black thick wool to keep the cameras and stuff from bumping each other. Put a pad of close density foam on the bottom and the home grown insert on top.

The two camera, ubiquitous looking bag, fast handling will serve you well. You seem to have stuck on the focal lengths you want so suggesting you might want to look at a 35/1.4 CV and 85/2 Nikkor (Black) combo on an R3A/M might not go over well. But a black camera and lenses (use the 90 frame lines for the 85 and you will be fine) will be smaller and allow you to blend in. I think you could do a better job with two lenses in that situation than three.

B2 (;->

 

[MikeCassidy]

I like the M3 for low light bright view finder easy to focus in low light easy to handle small; but I've been shooting one for 42 yrs so its second nature.

 

[BillBingham2]

If you want....

If you want....

Recently I got bored with digital and tried my hand at B/W film, started to develop my own. I also got interested in analogue gear again and love working with my old Nikons. I can operate my D200 very fluidly, but I like my FM more. If the pics come out lousy, I cannot blame the automation.

Get yourself a couple of Nikkor AI (AIed, AI, AIs) primes (single focal length lens) that are fast (35/1.4, 28/2, 85/1.8) and shoot them on manual. Get a katzeye focusing screen upgrade and use manual focus. Use the built in meter and pretend you have a digital FM. You will be surprise at how manual it feels and actually it. The D300 takes a few steps better, but as you have the D200, the cost is much lower. The D200 and D300 can be very manualized as long at you take an keep control of the box. No AF lenses. I might be wrong about the D200, but I know the D300 works very well this way

So I bought a Canonet for 20 euros and was very pleasantly surprised. Built in meter, fast and sharp lens, smallish and whisper quiet. That will be able to cover a lot of what I intend to do with a Leica.

You might take a look at the GR-DII from Ricoh and put her in Snap mode. Combine it with a black metal CV brightline finder and you have a very quick to use and powerful camera for much of what you want to do.

B2 (;->

 

[ZebGoesZeiss]

Well, you say you want to use fast 90mm lenses wide open, and with accuracy, at concerts and dimly lit conditions. Already, that will be a stretch. I did own the 90mm Summicron ASPH. Great lens, but not exactly easy to focus in dark conditions, at least not if it involves "action" photography. So, I would go for a camera with meter - one less thing to worry about. My choice would be the Zeiss Ikon (actually, I sold a M7 to get it - no regrets).

But to put it into perspective, for that money I can also get a Nikon FM3a for which I already own a bag full of excellent lenses. Choices, choices...

And it would probably be the "smart" thing to do. Spending big money on a rangefinder/lens combo to shoot fast and long, doesn't make sense in my book. Feel free to feel insulted, but I would think about this long and hard. Shooting 90mm f/2 at 5m distance gives you roughly 35cm depth of field. Add some action to the scene and you might as well close your eyes and hope for the best.

 

[Al Patterson]

Warning! Sarcasm alert!!

Warning! Sarcasm alert!!

Since Nick hasn't found this thread yet, I'll suggest you buy a Yashica GSN or Lynx. Best camera ever made, and MUCH cheaper than the Leica...


(I have the CL, which I do like BTW).

 

[fishtek]

bMattock....you mean "IWC" watch, eh?

The diversity of cameras that are a good match for each job is only matched by the diversity of photographers who visit this forum. For me, it's a matter of budget. I could sell ALL of my fixed-lens cameras, and still not have the money to afford a Leica with glass to match the quality of the body. That's fine. I have lots of fun playing with what I've got. JM2C...

Regards!
Don

 

[bmattock]

bMattock....you mean "IWC" watch, eh?

Sorry, yes, I did. Good catch.

The diversity of cameras that are a good match for each job is only matched by the diversity of photographers who visit this forum. For me, it's a matter of budget. I could sell ALL of my fixed-lens cameras, and still not have the money to afford a Leica with glass to match the quality of the body. That's fine. I have lots of fun playing with what I've got. JM2C...

I'm hip. But I began to wonder if this thread was really about 'help me choose' and not more about 'help me convince myself that what I really want is a Leica.'

I've never needed to be persuaded to indulge myself if I could afford it and wanted it (whatever 'it' might be), but I've seen that sort of thing before.