NickTrop
Veteran
dee said:
Easy. It's similar to the "placeo effect". Credit Leica - through savvy marketing, for creating enough "belief" in their voodoo to cause an actual physiological effect amongst their users.
To Leica or Not to Leica?
- Thread starter pcfranchina
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 54
- Views 4K
Easy. It's similar to the "placeo effect". Credit Leica - through savvy marketing, for creating enough "belief" in their voodoo to cause an actual physiological effect amongst their users.
boilerdoc2
Well-known
PC, if you do get a Leica. Wait ~ 6 months before deciding if you are keeping it. It took me that long to figure out the film loading and to get the hang of rangefinder focussing. Maybe I'm a little slow, but after that point it's all been good. And I mean REALLY good! There is no doubt now that the photos i take are anything but the best -technically- that can be made. If they aren't it's my own damned fault. As a result I'm spending way too much time -not!- in the darkroom. I use Leitz and CV lenses. All good to great! I now use them on my new M8 as well! Get 'er done! Cheers...
Steve
Steve
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
I'm gonna say yes, then tell you why. So, Yes.
Why? As a subjective personal matter, nothing works quite as well for me. I know that's the kind of voodoo BS that Leica people like to toss about, but I've tried to kick the habit a couple of times, which has cost me a fair bit of cash, and found that it really is true - for me. Since this is the internet, I can say YMMV.
My first "real" camera (after an Instamatic 44) was an M3 that I saved and saved and saved for and purchased used in 1972. In the 1980s I bought several more bodies, a large number of RF lenses and several Visoflex lenses. In the early 1990s I thought I really needed something different and sold almost all the Leica M gear - kept only my original M3 and a very late Dual Range Summicron. In the early 2000s I really wanted to get back to using the M cameras and bought an M5. I read and talked and really thought (and still believe) that the M5 is an objectively better camera than anything short of an M7, and might be better than an M7 in some ways - but I just couldn't get used to the size and shape of the body and the location of the controls. I recently sold the M5 and now have three Ms: my original M3, an early .72x M6 and a .85x M6 (a classic, not a TTL). The .85x is really intended to be an M3 with a meter...
Why do I keep selling and replacing? Because taking pictures is not entirely about the images. It's also, for me, about the experience, about how the tool fits and works. And, for me, the classic Leica body is just the right tool. So I'm done with the buy/sell/buy cycle, the ones I've got are keepers now.
You might not agree, or you might agree, but if you buy smart you can probably find out without a whole lot of risk - you should be able to sell for more or less what you invest, at least if you don't overpay when you buy and don't trade to a dealer when you sell.
For a car analogy, I think the Ms, at least through the M6 classic, are more like an MG-B than an Aston... 😉
Why? As a subjective personal matter, nothing works quite as well for me. I know that's the kind of voodoo BS that Leica people like to toss about, but I've tried to kick the habit a couple of times, which has cost me a fair bit of cash, and found that it really is true - for me. Since this is the internet, I can say YMMV.
My first "real" camera (after an Instamatic 44) was an M3 that I saved and saved and saved for and purchased used in 1972. In the 1980s I bought several more bodies, a large number of RF lenses and several Visoflex lenses. In the early 1990s I thought I really needed something different and sold almost all the Leica M gear - kept only my original M3 and a very late Dual Range Summicron. In the early 2000s I really wanted to get back to using the M cameras and bought an M5. I read and talked and really thought (and still believe) that the M5 is an objectively better camera than anything short of an M7, and might be better than an M7 in some ways - but I just couldn't get used to the size and shape of the body and the location of the controls. I recently sold the M5 and now have three Ms: my original M3, an early .72x M6 and a .85x M6 (a classic, not a TTL). The .85x is really intended to be an M3 with a meter...
Why do I keep selling and replacing? Because taking pictures is not entirely about the images. It's also, for me, about the experience, about how the tool fits and works. And, for me, the classic Leica body is just the right tool. So I'm done with the buy/sell/buy cycle, the ones I've got are keepers now.
You might not agree, or you might agree, but if you buy smart you can probably find out without a whole lot of risk - you should be able to sell for more or less what you invest, at least if you don't overpay when you buy and don't trade to a dealer when you sell.
For a car analogy, I think the Ms, at least through the M6 classic, are more like an MG-B than an Aston... 😉
Bryan Lee
Expat Street Photographer
And the classic rangfinder debate rages on. The bottem line for me is when the shutter is open the only thing that matters is what glass is between you and your subject. Focus is a issue and I believe I would like the focus on the Ikon from what Ive read but Ive never picked one up. I had a Bessa L for one year and made some nice images with it even though it had no rangfinder.
So here is the big difference, the exposure meter. Im sorry but older second hand exposure meters will just never be as desirable or reliable as new out of the box exposure meters. Just look at the new Bessa R2M exposure meter improvements and I have never read one complaint on this forum about the old meters. Is anybody complaining about their Ikon exposure meter?
I had a chance to get a M5 last week and passed on it for just this reason, The meter is old. I like new meters and they come on new cameras, I would like to see a detailed comparison of what kind of metering you get for what money when it comes to Cosina/Bessa/Ikon verses Leica.
So here is the big difference, the exposure meter. Im sorry but older second hand exposure meters will just never be as desirable or reliable as new out of the box exposure meters. Just look at the new Bessa R2M exposure meter improvements and I have never read one complaint on this forum about the old meters. Is anybody complaining about their Ikon exposure meter?
I had a chance to get a M5 last week and passed on it for just this reason, The meter is old. I like new meters and they come on new cameras, I would like to see a detailed comparison of what kind of metering you get for what money when it comes to Cosina/Bessa/Ikon verses Leica.
pcfranchina
Well-known
I have always thought the meter on my R3a has been accurate.
I think you'd eventually regret dumping all that gear even though you'd love the Leica. Maybe best to find another way. Consider how likely it will be that you'd have future use/need for the Pentax & Ricoh, for instance. Guage your yearning for a Leica by what it is about the Bessa you like and dislike...pcfranchina said:
When I was poorer, working part-time and going to school on the GI bill, I bought a 10-year-old Leica M2 (my first interchangeable-lens RF). That was 1967, I still have and use it, and as my only Leica I think it insulated me from further expensive Leica shopping! After all, I'd "been there, done that" in becoming a Leica owner. I didn't sell or trade in my Pentax gear in its purchase, and actually used them together... I paired the M2 + 35mm (its only lens) with Pentax + 85mm for city street photography, and this worked rather well.
Good luck in your quest!
los
Established
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I've read it before and believe he makes some good points - as long as its taken as being overstated for polemical effect and as a counter to overstatement of contrary views. RFs have real advantages as do SLRs. If you like RFs and their advantages, and can use them to their strengths, then use them and enjoy your photos. Leica produces nice RF cameras. Use them for their practical advantages if you wish. If you're sensible, you'll realise they're not literally magical. But if it pleases you to believe in the magic then, well, why not? Who does it hurt?los said:
...Mike
Last edited:
dee
Well-known
I would not have sold my Minoltas to aquire a Leica or two ... [ worthless though they now are !]
But my situation is a now - or - never - inheritance - followed - by - no - income
sort of situation - plus ASdee [ autisic ] stuff .
I now would love to buy a later metered M series 'cos the little IIIf enlightened me , even though it would be bigger and heavier - but won't let go of my II,s and III,s to fund it .
If you try to agonise over the ''logic '', it won't happen - if you pick one up play with it , and it's ''right '' somehow ....... that's it really !
But my situation is a now - or - never - inheritance - followed - by - no - income
sort of situation - plus ASdee [ autisic ] stuff .
I now would love to buy a later metered M series 'cos the little IIIf enlightened me , even though it would be bigger and heavier - but won't let go of my II,s and III,s to fund it .
If you try to agonise over the ''logic '', it won't happen - if you pick one up play with it , and it's ''right '' somehow ....... that's it really !
oscroft
Veteran
Much as I'd like a Leica but really can't afford one, my answer to that specific question is "Never" - for me the versatility of having a range of affordable bodies and lenses would always far outweigh the aesthetic pleasure of having a Leica.
pcfranchina
Well-known
It is nice to have a range of gear. SLR, DSLR, RF, FSU RF, P&S. I would probably regret it. A while back I got rid of my QL17 GIII and I really regret that one.
40oz
...
pcfranchina said:
I completely agree with that sentiment. I'd not sacrifice all to get a Leica, but I'd sacrifice small things here and there to get one. IMHO, they really are worth it just for using. But they aren't a replacement for anything but something you don't like using very much.
pcfranchina
Well-known
Thanks all for your opinions.
Peter55
Leica M5 & Summilux User
wlewisiii - Hi,
I have a Crown Graphic but the shuter nees new blades. I was thinking of just getting a new Copal shutter. I'm not shure if the size is "O".it should be but I'm not sure.
Do you know the size?
I have a Crown Graphic but the shuter nees new blades. I was thinking of just getting a new Copal shutter. I'm not shure if the size is "O".it should be but I'm not sure.
Do you know the size?
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Peter55 said:
Peter55,
I'm not wlewisiii, but what shutter and lens do you have on your Crown Graphic? Are you sure it needs new blades or are they just sticking?
If you have a Graphex or Supermatic shutter they can usually be put back into service by Carol Miller at Flutot's Camera Repair for a whole lot less money than a new copal shutter.
http://www.flutotscamerarepair.com/
Wayne