Thinking about buying a Leica... which one?

M

Mike Ip

Vagabond Light Collector
Local time
2:14 AM
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
110
Location
New York
View My Gallery
Hello everyone.

I'm new to this board and Leicas and rangefinders in general. I'm a starting photojournalist and wanted something to compliment my Canon rig. After doing some research, it seems like going with a rangefinder for my ultra wide stuff would suit me well. I'm not completely satisfied with the UW solutions that Canon offers.

So not knowing too much about Leicas, I'm hear to inquire what the more Leica experienced users can suggest.

My main focus will be with the 28-35 range, possibly 50 - though not the main concern.
The thought of the M8 sounds great, not having to deal with film, however, the 1.3x crop factor scares me away from that slightly, and the Epson R-D1 even more.

So I started looking at the M6s, M7s, and MPs, coupled with a good film scanner such as the Nikon Coolscan V. Those all seem like excellent cameras. Would the M6 Classic, being an older rig, cause me to run into problems down the line? If so what kind? Would I just be better off spending a little more money getting the TTL version?

Then the options of the M7 and MP come into play. The M7 certainly looks like a great camera, but I don't like the fact that it only functions at two shutter speeds when it runs out of batteries (or is that just a stupid thing to worry about?). The MP, from what I read, seems like a super version of the M6.

So choices choices choices. So the main decisions I'm trying to make are film + scanner vs digital. And if either way, which body should I go for?

Also keep in mind, because I'll only be shooting 28+35 (and possibly 50) I don't really think I would be spending *too much* money on lenses. I'll probably want to by the fastest 28 and 35 - which are both f/1.4?

I hope I haven't overwhelmed you for all the questions I'm asking. I truly appreciate the help, and hope to be a Leica user soon.

Mike
 
Cann't help you with the film vs. digital, but

- the M6 (non TTL) is a very robust camera and a great user.
- The fastest 28 and 35 are 1.9 and 1.2, both from Cosina Voigtlander and great lenses.

Enjoy (and welcome, of course),

Roland.
 
Maybe to clarify: I didn't mean to say the MP would be a bad choice.
A dream camera for me in a way. But it's a matter of budget mostly. You
can probably get a good used M6 + 28/1.9 + 35/1.2 kit for around US 2000,
or a new MP + latest Leitz 28/2 + latest Leitz 35/1.4 (fastest Leitz
lenses in that range) for around US 10k (?).

Best,

Roland.
 
Welcome to the jungle,

When you say Ultra Wide, I'm thinking 16-21mm lenses or wider.

I would think using Ultra Wide angle lenses on most rangefinder cameras would be more troublesome because you probably need to use external viewfinder for composing and then switch back and forth to the main viewfinder.

I suspect the RF camera for you is a Bessa R4M, ask backalley (Joe), he has one.
 
For pro work, for me what counts is a no hassle camera with a first rate lens on top, always ready to shoot.
Save yourself some money and get a ZI with the 35 Biogon for a start. If you want a backup, get Bessa R4A with the Biogon 25 or even 21. Both these cameras cost less than a used M7. If you are fixed with the mechanical reliability, get the M6 0.72 with a 35mm and the Bessa R4A with a wideangle.
 
Thanks for the advice so far.

I guess I erred when I said ultra wide. Or maybe I was just too anxious to get my post posted and just had a hiccup. But mostly I'll be using the 28 and 35 to be photographing people in say war zones etc etc. So the M6 ttl and all it's ruggedness sounds excellent.

In terms of budget. I guess I really don't have one. I try not to let finances limit me from getting what I need/want. Just for reference, I bought my entire canon digital rig all in a two week period after doing my research. I could have bought a setup "good enough" for about $2000, but spent about four times that getting exactly what I wanted.

Before I bought my Canon setup, however, I asked around a lot, saying I didn't really have a budget, but at the same time I wasn't just going to throw my money away. For instance, I wasn't going to pay for a 50 1.0 when all I really needed was a 50 1.2 etc etc.

So I guess given that information, I should state what I'd be shooting. I'd say much of my stuff would be outside in the daylight. With my canon, I tote around a tripod just about everywhere I can. However, with a Leica, I'd like the use that in absence of a tripod. I will shoot some indoor stuff, and some low light stuff, but it wouldn't be my main focus. I'd like faster lens to utilize faster shutter speeds and slower films. I gather that most Leica lens are sharp wide open all the way stopped down, so that would be an absolute commodity having the best lens.

So I guess for the 35, I'd want a 1.4 summilux? And for the 28 ....?
 
Hello. I am new to these forums as well (as you can see : first post). I faced the same dilema as you. Canon ultrawides not satisfying, thinking about the Coolscan V and wandering that if I jumped into rangefinders I couldn't by the way also do another type of photography. Here's what I found...

If you are doing ultrawides only go for a Bessa L, used at around $100 and with TTL metering you can't be wrong. Cosina-Voigtlander also offers excellent UWA at bargain prices.

If you want photojournalism than a Leica would be very fine I guess. I went for a used M6. I am still waiting for the delivery. The scariest thing as far as I am concerned and being a DSLR guy is the lack of AE mode. It's only available with the M7... or a Voigtlander Bessa R2A, R3A or R4A. If you want "fast" action AE is a very nice plus.

For the lenses I'll let the other members speak. I went for the Leitz 40/C.
 
Wow,

I feel a bit silly. I had never even heard of a Bessa or Ikon prior to this post. Reading up on the R4M/R4A, that actually sounds quite nice. Wondering about the ruggedness of it, and more importantly the resistance of dust.
 
If I were starting out in a career, I'd look around at what working photojournalists were carrying. RF, film, and home-scanning could get the job done, but maybe not competively at this stage of your career.

To the degree that I understand your "needs" I'd select, in order:

1. Add a Canon 16-35L 2.8. Fast, wide, and sharp. The 24-105L IS a great lens, but not as fast and those extra 8mm on the wide end are nice to have. I'm not a working journalist, but I stare at them a lot. They use zooms.

2. Bessa L and a CV21. I carried this with my Canon kit. Great fun. No focussing at all beyond 15 ft. Doesn't do much that a high quality Canon can't, but it weighs approximately nothing.

3. M8. I can't imagine depending on or hassling with film for my working camera. M8 complements an SLR with zooms, but not if you use it as a second body on a shoot. The RF size lets you be less conspicuous and get access to subjects, but not if you are lugging a basket of SLR behind you. There are reasons for not owning this camera, but the 1.3 crop factor is far down the line.
Martin
 
You are like me, a working guy, just cut to the chase and don't even mess around here.

Get a clean M6TTL with a .58 finder, SF-20 flash, Nikon SC17 cord ( eBay ) 28mm 2.0 Summicron and 35mm 1.4 lux and you will be SO good to go.

I am serious, just get er' done.

The TTL is awesome on the M6 with the SF-20, you knock it back 2-3 stops with an amber gel or bounce it and it looks so darn rich with that aspheric glass, you will wonder why in the heck did you not do this sooner.

Seriously....

In addition to three Leica M film rigs, I have an M8 that will get here tomorrow. And own a large array of Canon by the way including most of their best L primes.
 
Then buy the newest M6 your budget can afford. Its a great place to start. Lens? Get a wide and a normal.

As stated above, the Biogon 35/2.0 is a good place to start and as cost effective as you'll find for a stellar contender to Leica.
 
Last edited:
Mike Ip said:
Wow,

I feel a bit silly. I had never even heard of a Bessa or Ikon prior to this post. Reading up on the R4M/R4A, that actually sounds quite nice. Wondering about the ruggedness of it, and more importantly the resistance of dust.
Click to expand...

Mike, I own a Leica M8, Leica M6TTL, and Zeiss Ikon. I have previously owned two Voigtlanders: an R2A and an R2M.

I agree with a previous poster: you are professional and can evidently justify paying some money for the right tools. Leicas are not only built very solidly, but the company stocks repair parts for 30 years for its models. I liked the Voigtlanders as shooters, but I would not expect them to hold up in a war zone based on my experience. A Zeiss Ikon would be an OK backup, but if you can afford a Leica as a backup get one! In fact, a US warranty Leica has a three-year "no questions asked" repair warranty. I have benefited from this, because unfortunately I do drop lenses sometimes and they do break.

My suggestion: A new Leica MP (even better than my M6TTL) so you have all shutter speeds if batteries die. As a second body/backup, get another Leica.

You should not dismiss the idea of an M8, either. If you are really daunted by the price of a Leica 21mm (equiv of 28mm on an M8), you can use the excellent Voigtlander 21mm, which is what I use. A Leica Summicron 28mm f/2, which is a shockingly sharp lens, will be a great lens on either an M8 or MP.

Have fun sorting all this out, and fun with whatever you buy!
 
Or you could get a new M7 (with an M2 as backup). Then register the M7 and you get the Leica passport - ie. everything fixed for 5 years 🙂

That way, if you step on a mine, or an IED goes off, they'll fix your camera.

Are you *sure* you want to go to a war zone? Dust is not the major problem there, I hear.



colin
 
If you don't want/need a built in meter you could look at an M4P, if you do you don't need to look any further then an M6 in good shape. Or you can get both of them if you don't mind settling for user bodies.
 
Mike,
I own a Leica IIIf and an M8. I once owned an M3.
My suggestion is to begin with a simple IIIf. They are relatively cheap ($200-$400) and screwmount lenses are readily available including new one from CV.
The IIIf can tell you if you like the Leica rangefinder experience at a low cost. You can then move up to an M6 or M7 and your screwmount lenses will fit the M cameras with available adapters.
I also have Canon dSLR gear which is terrific but I find myself using the Leicas more and more. I now tend to use the Canon gear only for events that require it such as low light, fast action sporting events where a fast telephoto with autofocus is a must.
Eric
 
Hi Mike and welcome to the board !

I am no pro at all but have some small experience in shooting under very low conditions, like bars events etc. Owning a IIIf, MP and M4-P I would not consider a IIIf for starting with RF photography. The M-Leicas have a much brighter and easier to use range-finder and the loading is much easier. If you want to use a Leica for professional work and money is no big issue, I would recommend a MP with 0.58 finder, and either the 28mm f/2.0 OR 35mm f/1.4. It will be a lot of money but if you don't beat you camera to death it will keep a high re-sale value.
 
I see several issues here that need sorting out. First, the M6 is not necessarily the last word in ruggedness, especially if you are taking it into a war zone. The rangefinder bumps out of alignment fairly easily. I've only had this happen once, and I own three m6s. But others have reported having the same experience. My M2 rangefinder never has gone out of alignment in the 45 years I've owned it. The most rugged and reliable Ms are the M2, M3, and M4. They just don't build 'em like they used to.

However, the M2/3/4 lack the 28mm frameline, which might incline you back toward the later models, like M6, M7, or MP. The finders on my M7 and MP have not yet (so far) bumped out of alignment. But take that with a grain of salt--it could happen tomorrow. Besides, I'm not shooting in a war zone, and my MP gets babied in a nice Luigi leather case.

Next, If you decide on a film camera, you might consider a model with .58 magnification finder. It is much easier to see the 28mm frameline with a .58 model.

Now as for your concern about the 1.33 crop factor of the M8. That's not a problem! Not for the focal lengths you want. A 21mm lens will give you the effective field of view of a 28mm on a film camera. a 24mm lens will give you the equivalent of a 32mm field--a compromise between 28 and 35! And a 28mm will give a 37.3mm film equivalent.

Finally, a 25mm will come a bit closer to your 35mm goal than will the 24mm. Both Voigtlander and Zeiss make 25mm M-mount lenses.

If you are shooting for a news agency, I can see the advantage of going digital, since you can plug the camera into a laptop and send the pictures in immediately. That might argue for an M8. It might even argue better for a D80, at 1/8 the price. If it gets smashed, you can pull out another one and keep shooting!

Take care when going into harm's way, you hear?
 
This thread is interesting as a "thought experiment," but I losing touch with the original poster's particular reality. He has said that he has spent some money on Canon gear (film I presume?) and has another bunch to spend on a second camera (perhaps Leica) to complement the first.

I have some trouble piecing together what the OP knows and is asking for, and what are simply passing thoughts. Does someone begin a career (" I'm a starting photojournalist") with thoughts of - - -maybe I should get a camera that's good for use in a "war zone"? And if so, deciding on which camera to take along to the war is probably not at the core of this person's most important life issues. The OP's user profile identifies him as 26 yrs old and his occupation as "vagabond." Both are honorable places in life's journey, but parsing out the benefits of a particular M camera seems to have drifted from the help this poster can use.

On the other hand, I enjoy hearing how other posters would equip themselves.🙂

Martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom