Bill Pierce
Well-known
News photographers using rangefinder cameras need several bodies, not only to work with different focal length lenses quickly, but to cover themselves if a camera should break down when they are on the road. The expense of such a camera system with modern digital Leicas (plus some breakdowns that I experienced with the first digital M’s) made me move away from Leicas for the first time since I started using one when I was a student in high school. There is no full substitute for a Leica, but I needed smaller, quieter, less conspicuous cameras than my DSLR’s, ones which could view and shoot quickly even in dim light and ones I could afford.
The first camera I tried was the Ricoh GXR Mount A12 which accepted my Leica lenses, whose micro-lens arrangement is designed to deal with the physically shorter focal lengths found in the non retrofocus and modest retrofocus wide angle designs and whose lack of an anti-aliasing filter contributes to maintaining their ability to capture fine detail. It’s a wonderful camera. I still use it.
But, in the end, I chose to build a small camera system out of the Fuji X series that uses a 16MP X-Trans sensor (no anti aliasing, a different pattern than the more universal Bayer array) that gives me image quality similar to that of my full frame DSLR’s. The system isn’t fully developed yet; there are lenses and bodies, announced or rumored, that have yet to make it to the camera stores’ shelves. The X Pro gives me both bright line and TTL viewing. The XE 1 limits me to through the lens viewing, but gives me a smaller body. The X 100s, with its fixed equivalent of a 35-mm full frame lens gives me both bright line and through the lens viewing in that small body size. The 100s, totally different in its mechanics and technical features from a Leica, comes closest to capturing the spirit of the Leicas I grew up with.
With the price of digital Leicas what they are I know that I am not the only person who has replaced his system, especially if they have a need for multiple bodies. (I use to use 9 Leicas - 3 around my neck, 3 in the hotel room and 3 in the shop getting cleaned, lubricated and adjusted. I was not in any way unusual.) I don’t think there is any substitute for a Leica system, but it is just too expensive for a young kid whose work abroad is in many ways more dangerous than what I and my friends did and,yet, for which he not only gets paid less than we did, he probably doesn’t get a translator/driver/guide and good medical insurance.
So, if you are amongst the many who can not afford a Leica system, what are you using for an inconspicuous, easily portable but high quality system? What are your hopes for the future? And what advice do you give others facing this problem? I think this is a real problem. I'm getting too old to always carry a brace of full frame DSLR's.
The first camera I tried was the Ricoh GXR Mount A12 which accepted my Leica lenses, whose micro-lens arrangement is designed to deal with the physically shorter focal lengths found in the non retrofocus and modest retrofocus wide angle designs and whose lack of an anti-aliasing filter contributes to maintaining their ability to capture fine detail. It’s a wonderful camera. I still use it.
But, in the end, I chose to build a small camera system out of the Fuji X series that uses a 16MP X-Trans sensor (no anti aliasing, a different pattern than the more universal Bayer array) that gives me image quality similar to that of my full frame DSLR’s. The system isn’t fully developed yet; there are lenses and bodies, announced or rumored, that have yet to make it to the camera stores’ shelves. The X Pro gives me both bright line and TTL viewing. The XE 1 limits me to through the lens viewing, but gives me a smaller body. The X 100s, with its fixed equivalent of a 35-mm full frame lens gives me both bright line and through the lens viewing in that small body size. The 100s, totally different in its mechanics and technical features from a Leica, comes closest to capturing the spirit of the Leicas I grew up with.
With the price of digital Leicas what they are I know that I am not the only person who has replaced his system, especially if they have a need for multiple bodies. (I use to use 9 Leicas - 3 around my neck, 3 in the hotel room and 3 in the shop getting cleaned, lubricated and adjusted. I was not in any way unusual.) I don’t think there is any substitute for a Leica system, but it is just too expensive for a young kid whose work abroad is in many ways more dangerous than what I and my friends did and,yet, for which he not only gets paid less than we did, he probably doesn’t get a translator/driver/guide and good medical insurance.
So, if you are amongst the many who can not afford a Leica system, what are you using for an inconspicuous, easily portable but high quality system? What are your hopes for the future? And what advice do you give others facing this problem? I think this is a real problem. I'm getting too old to always carry a brace of full frame DSLR's.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
My primary digital kit is based on my M-mount lenses—10 Voigtländer, Zeiss, and Leica lenses.
Leica M9 body, 3 batteries
Ricoh GXR body, 3 batteries
I've made 28,000 exposures with them so far, since March 2011, with no problems or service needs so far. They all just work perfectly, and produce photos of equal or better quality to the DSLRs I've used in the past.
I'll add a Sony NEX 6 body + M-bayonet adapter, batteries, to my kit soon. It has some features that I think will be some additional advantage to my work. The same lenses will be used. I may add another Leica M body next year too.
(I do keep one DSLR in my kit for sports and long lens use, where its bulk and weight are a secondary consideration.)
If I couldn't afford the Leica bodies, I'd be perfectly happy with these mirrorless bodies. I like my lenses and have no desire to buy another lens line. The Fuji bodies do not work as well with my lenses as the Ricoh and Sony: I tried the Xpro1 and returned it.
G
Leica M9 body, 3 batteries
Ricoh GXR body, 3 batteries
I've made 28,000 exposures with them so far, since March 2011, with no problems or service needs so far. They all just work perfectly, and produce photos of equal or better quality to the DSLRs I've used in the past.
I'll add a Sony NEX 6 body + M-bayonet adapter, batteries, to my kit soon. It has some features that I think will be some additional advantage to my work. The same lenses will be used. I may add another Leica M body next year too.
(I do keep one DSLR in my kit for sports and long lens use, where its bulk and weight are a secondary consideration.)
If I couldn't afford the Leica bodies, I'd be perfectly happy with these mirrorless bodies. I like my lenses and have no desire to buy another lens line. The Fuji bodies do not work as well with my lenses as the Ricoh and Sony: I tried the Xpro1 and returned it.
G
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Fuji XPro-1 and a Ricoh for me. Leica lenses get slapped on these puppies and I am a happy man. And the M9. But if I had little scratch, I'd start with the Fuji.
Ben
Ben
Eric T
Well-known
Fuji XPro-1 and, more recently, the Sigma DP2 Merrill. The Foveon X3 sensor is amazing.
Sylvester
Well-known
I'm a student photographer and I shoot a leica just as you did... I wish I could afford a digital leica or two...
I think the most viable option is the Xpro1 with the 50 equivalent and the 90... I'd wait for the 35 equivalent to come out instead of buying the x100s...
I think the most viable option is the Xpro1 with the 50 equivalent and the 90... I'd wait for the 35 equivalent to come out instead of buying the x100s...
SausalitoDog
Well-known
I'm exactly on the same track ( but I don't have an x100s yet 
To be honest, as much as the mythical appeal of Leica pulls at me, I think I really like the x series better...much much lighter is a good thing (the Leica M9 feels as heavy as my Nikon D3); also the ability to switch from manual to auto focus is huge for me - as my eyes get older I find my self auto focusing more and more...and of course the hybrid finder is amazing.
I even bought my first Lecia lens (28mm 2.8 Elmarit), a really really sweet little lens... But the lack of auto focus has pretty much made it a specialty lens for me. I am quite happy with the build and quality of the Fuji lenses (have all but the zoom) and am lusting for the upcoming 27mm pancake lens. I'll also take a hard look at the Zeiss lenses announced for this Summer - they will be full compatible with all the fuji features (as in auto focus
It's a great time to be a photographer. I think the x100 is the biggest innovation since the Nikon d1 !!!
Cheers,
Tom
To be honest, as much as the mythical appeal of Leica pulls at me, I think I really like the x series better...much much lighter is a good thing (the Leica M9 feels as heavy as my Nikon D3); also the ability to switch from manual to auto focus is huge for me - as my eyes get older I find my self auto focusing more and more...and of course the hybrid finder is amazing.
I even bought my first Lecia lens (28mm 2.8 Elmarit), a really really sweet little lens... But the lack of auto focus has pretty much made it a specialty lens for me. I am quite happy with the build and quality of the Fuji lenses (have all but the zoom) and am lusting for the upcoming 27mm pancake lens. I'll also take a hard look at the Zeiss lenses announced for this Summer - they will be full compatible with all the fuji features (as in auto focus
It's a great time to be a photographer. I think the x100 is the biggest innovation since the Nikon d1 !!!
Cheers,
Tom
rbelyell
Well-known
bill, as a gxr user, along with an x100, i am curious why you felt you needed to add the xpro to your gxr--what didi it give you besides ovf that you werent getting from the gxr, especially when using it with rf glass?
tony
tony
JRminox
Established
Foveon: if and only if the light is good and plentiful. Not exactly an ideal tool for photo-journalism. Great for landscapes.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
When I first bought the GXR there were rumors that there would be a 16MG version, other lens/sensor combos without an AA filter, e.t.c.. That was a long time ago and with the acquisition of Pentax, those positive rumors have have been replaced with rumors of Ricoh cameras like the M mount unit disappearing. I think the camera is great. But it's not part of an evolving system. I'm one of those system guys as compared to a single camera guy because, in addition to taking pictures for myself, I take pictures for other people. I need a bigger toolbox than if I was just taking the personal pictures that are my first love.
willie_901
Veteran
For 23 months I've used either the X100 or X-Pro 1 with 14/2.8, 18/2 and 35/1.4 lenses.
These days I use mostly the 18/2 as my daily carry.
I am very pleased with this combination. I plan to pick up the 23/1.4 and 57/1.4 lenses. I need a finder I can raise to my eye. I am greatful I can use an OVF or EVF depending on the situation. The Fujinon lenses do not disappoint me in the least and meet 95% of my non-commercial needs. I do use a D700 with a 50/1.8 G lens and and off-camera strobe (bounced) when I photograph young children indoors.
My hope for the future is Fuji continues to sell a lot of cameras and lenses. I am thrilled Zeiss will start shipping XF lenses this year.
While I coud afford Leicas, I don't want them. So I really don't think about what Leica may or may not do. I have abandoned any hope someone other then Leica will make a digital body with a mechanical, optical rangefinder. I have no expectations Nikon or Canon will ever make a camera I will enjoy using. So I don't think about DSLR centric companies either.
One thing I would like in the future is a Bluetooth interface to provide the option to set menu parameters via a smartphone or tablet app. This would eliminate the clunky, inconvenient way we change operational parameters. Firmware updates could be via app updates. Hopefully this would increase number of functional improvements manufacturers release. A WiFi enabled camera equipped with on-board SSD memory would eliminate the need for external memory cards. For some of us this sort of wireless connectivity would simplify life.
When asked I advise people to use at least an APS-C sensor camera. Smaller sensors require extremely fast lenses to achieve approximate equivalent performance (keeping perspective constant). A f 1.4 35 mm APS-C lens is more practical than a 25mm f 1.0 m4/3 lens. The wonderful Fujinon 14/2.8 lens is another example. How much would a 10mm f 2.0 lens with similar native optical performance cost for m4/3 and how big would it be? For me personally APS-C is the sweet spot in the compromise of between, size, cost, flexibility and performance. Of course others feel differently for a variety of valid reasons. The market place provides an abundance of options and we vote with our money.
These days I use mostly the 18/2 as my daily carry.
I am very pleased with this combination. I plan to pick up the 23/1.4 and 57/1.4 lenses. I need a finder I can raise to my eye. I am greatful I can use an OVF or EVF depending on the situation. The Fujinon lenses do not disappoint me in the least and meet 95% of my non-commercial needs. I do use a D700 with a 50/1.8 G lens and and off-camera strobe (bounced) when I photograph young children indoors.
My hope for the future is Fuji continues to sell a lot of cameras and lenses. I am thrilled Zeiss will start shipping XF lenses this year.
While I coud afford Leicas, I don't want them. So I really don't think about what Leica may or may not do. I have abandoned any hope someone other then Leica will make a digital body with a mechanical, optical rangefinder. I have no expectations Nikon or Canon will ever make a camera I will enjoy using. So I don't think about DSLR centric companies either.
One thing I would like in the future is a Bluetooth interface to provide the option to set menu parameters via a smartphone or tablet app. This would eliminate the clunky, inconvenient way we change operational parameters. Firmware updates could be via app updates. Hopefully this would increase number of functional improvements manufacturers release. A WiFi enabled camera equipped with on-board SSD memory would eliminate the need for external memory cards. For some of us this sort of wireless connectivity would simplify life.
When asked I advise people to use at least an APS-C sensor camera. Smaller sensors require extremely fast lenses to achieve approximate equivalent performance (keeping perspective constant). A f 1.4 35 mm APS-C lens is more practical than a 25mm f 1.0 m4/3 lens. The wonderful Fujinon 14/2.8 lens is another example. How much would a 10mm f 2.0 lens with similar native optical performance cost for m4/3 and how big would it be? For me personally APS-C is the sweet spot in the compromise of between, size, cost, flexibility and performance. Of course others feel differently for a variety of valid reasons. The market place provides an abundance of options and we vote with our money.
raphaelaaron
Well-known
I own a Leica M6, M9P, and have owned previously an M8.2
However, more and more I find myself drawn to the fuji series cameras, especially the X100S. I feel like this just could be what some photographers have been saying as Fuji being the new Leica.
They seem to do the job right.
This would not surprise me. For instance, my Ricoh GRD has taken the place of my primary street shooter. Rarely now do I even bring my Leicas out to play. I found out the reason behind that is just how fun and easy it is to shoot with. A sort of camera that helps you just to 'forget' and just shoot.
Continuing in that same fashion, if I did finally obtain an X100S, I would not be surprised if I stopped shooting my Leicas altogether.
However, more and more I find myself drawn to the fuji series cameras, especially the X100S. I feel like this just could be what some photographers have been saying as Fuji being the new Leica.
They seem to do the job right.
This would not surprise me. For instance, my Ricoh GRD has taken the place of my primary street shooter. Rarely now do I even bring my Leicas out to play. I found out the reason behind that is just how fun and easy it is to shoot with. A sort of camera that helps you just to 'forget' and just shoot.
Continuing in that same fashion, if I did finally obtain an X100S, I would not be surprised if I stopped shooting my Leicas altogether.
Lss
Well-known
There are naturally special cases where that would be most convenient, and of course there is nothing wrong in providing such additional features. But using a secondary device to set up a primary device that you use two hands to control is not generally an improvement (with current UI technologies). So, it is a question of how far into the future you are looking.
rbelyell
Well-known
robert blu
quiet photographer
Not yet done but I'm going to buy the XE1 for the reasons already mentioned (mainly size, lenses and IQ). I have a Leica x1 which was my first digital camera and I still use a lot but has its own limit. I m really convinced that with digital is not worthwhile to spend too much money, things will change anyway too quick.
robert
robert
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Robert,
Yes and no. Will an M240 give me better pics than my M9? I doubt it; and even if it did, would it make so much difference that I should trade in my M9? I'd be astonished if it did.
So I spent quite a lot of money on an M9...
Will you be at Arles?
Cheers,
R.
willie_901
Veteran
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Hmm. I find the opposite to be true for me. Shooting assignments, all I needed was an Olympus E-5, a second body for backup, an 11-22 and a 50-200 lens. A 35 and 50 macro, and a Summilux 25/1.4 rounded out the kit for when close up, or very low light had to be accommodated.
My personal work spans many more things and pushes me to explore many different visual ideas. Different equipment capabilities drives different visual approaches. What i like to shoot with also has a larger impact on what i choose. So, since closing the business, my equipment mix has expanded and diversified enormously.
G
Lss
Well-known
Yes, these things may be useful for a very different camera form factor to which we are accustomed, or for creating something else than the single exposure photograph (or a simple continuous recording such as video) for which current digital cameras have essentially been designed. Just throwing apps at the interface of, say, Leica M 240 or Canon 1D X however does not sound more than providing additional, nice-to-have features on top of the core experience.
A current camera interface expects for the photographer to choose the time, framing, focus, and exposure. This seems to work quite nicely, although many approaches simplify at least one of these aspects. There is of course much room to work with more than what we have now in terms of the interface design. For example framing without changing perspective (camera location and orientation) or focus plane adaptation (with or) without physical camera movements are quite interesting problems. Most of the "problems" I can think of are computational features.
konicaman
konicaman
XE-1 with the 18-55 (first time I have really liked a zoom and the results it produces)
Powershot G12 for back up - it is adequate in daylight.
Just above 1 kg, real lightweight setup.
M+M9+3 lenses = Must either stop eating or prostitute girlfriend, so not really an option
Powershot G12 for back up - it is adequate in daylight.
Just above 1 kg, real lightweight setup.
M+M9+3 lenses = Must either stop eating or prostitute girlfriend, so not really an option
thegman
Veteran
Ignoring the obvious solution of continuing to use film, where even Leicas can be had for a reasonable price, certainly less than a XPro-1, anyway:
If I were compelled to shoot digital, then I'd likely get a small DSLR. I don't buy into the "conspicuous" argument. When I used my Rolleiflex in Bruges, some people could barely believe what they were seeing, I got a lot of stares. When I used my D7000, Lumix G1, or Sigma DP-1 in other places, nobody cared, it's just another digital camera to them.
I've had a lot of staring with my Leica too, maybe they are other Leica users, pleased to see another user, but I think it's just because they stand out a mile compared to the black plastic you see everywhere else.
And it's not like a small Pentax DSLR weighs much either. If you don't like how they work, then that can't be helped.
If you like the way classic cameras work though, the number of digital options can be counted on one hand, and are rarely cheap. In the film world, more choice than most of us will ever get the chance to use, and 99% of it is highly affordable.
If I were compelled to shoot digital, then I'd likely get a small DSLR. I don't buy into the "conspicuous" argument. When I used my Rolleiflex in Bruges, some people could barely believe what they were seeing, I got a lot of stares. When I used my D7000, Lumix G1, or Sigma DP-1 in other places, nobody cared, it's just another digital camera to them.
I've had a lot of staring with my Leica too, maybe they are other Leica users, pleased to see another user, but I think it's just because they stand out a mile compared to the black plastic you see everywhere else.
And it's not like a small Pentax DSLR weighs much either. If you don't like how they work, then that can't be helped.
If you like the way classic cameras work though, the number of digital options can be counted on one hand, and are rarely cheap. In the film world, more choice than most of us will ever get the chance to use, and 99% of it is highly affordable.