your feedback re: Giving Leica a try?

[Mcary]

Owned and used Leica's, M4-2, M6 and M8 for a few years and thoroughly enjoyed using all of them. But decided that for me the X100 when I wanted something light weight and compact, along with 120 and 4x5 for when I'm doing more structured shoots was the right combination for me.
BTW in the end I lost about $100 each when I sold the M8 and M6 so in real terms they each cost me about $8-10 a month.

 

[RallyFan]

Lots of great advice in here, but I'm going to buck the trend a little bit and recommend checking out a Leica III. For quite some time I tried talking myself out of wanting one. I looked at Voigtlanders, Leica CL's, cheap and well worn M's, and Canon RF's. This is personal preference, but nothing felt as right as the little Leica III. It is a statement to superb manufacturing in it's simplest state. Finally, I picked up a mint IIIf for $350, and I love it dearly. They're not for everyone, but I certainly recommend checking one out. It may just surprise you!

Also others mentioned developing on your own. I say it's well worth the try. It's pretty simple for B&W, and you'll need less than $100 to get you started. I know my local lab charges about $15 for developing/scanning, so it adds up pretty quickly.

 

[thegman]

At the moment, I'm trying to give up shooting 35mm film to focus on medium format. However, if I was shooting 35mm film, Leica is unbeatable I think. Sure, they're pricey and somewhat inflexible when it comes to longer lenses or macro, but for sheer beauty, I've not used anything better. You're an artist you say, so I guess beauty may be as important to you, maybe more important to you than simple practicality. If that's the case, Leica is very, very hard to beat.

I've never used a Leica III, but they're cheaper than Leica M, and every bit as lovely to look at.

I don't really buy into this concept you hear a lot about, that colour film is a waste, and you may as well shoot digital. You can get beautiful pastel tones by over-exposing Portra 160 or Fuji 400H. Or you can get very rich contrast with slide film such as Velvia. Yes, you can get similar effects from digital colour, but you can emulate B&W film in digital too, but of course neither are true film, and it seems that's what you're interested in.

Investing in film gear at this stage I think is just fine, let's say you can't buy film in 10 years, your film gear may go down in price, maybe. You can 100% guarantee that any digital gear you buy now will be next to worthless in 10 years, guaranteed.

And anyway, the point of all this is to enjoy a hobby/art, not to stress about buying and selling gear.

Whether you want a Leica or some other film camera is up to you, many will say you can get the same results from a $300 camera/lens and they are 100% correct. But I would suggest it's not about sheer practicality, budgeting or results, it's about enjoying yourself.

 

[Messsucherkamera]

Keith- Thats the bottom line/insight I think I was looking for but I did not pose the question as eloquently and not as straightforward as you did...
Question: being I am not printing/processing and getting the negs converted to digital- does it still make sense?...dan

Most of my photography these days is done using my Leica M kit. For B&W, I use Kodak Tri-X 400 which I develop by hand at home in D-76 developer @1:1 strength. I have the negs scanned and then have inkjet prints made. The results are beautiful. By going this route, I have the option of making either inkjet prints or traditional B&W silver prints. For color, I shoot Fuji Velvia and have the chromes scanned to make prints. I have a negative in my hand and don't have to worry about corrupted files, damaged discs and hard drive failures.

In many ways, this hybrid workflow offers the best ot both digital and film photography ( I am 100% film based and I don't own even one digital camera; I am quite happy working this way because it is simple and it works, if you can live without the instant gratification of digital). There is a visual texture - a "fingerprint" to film based images - that digital cannot match, at least to my eye.

You don't have to spend $8000 on a digital Leica M body to get into the world of Leica M photography. For somewhere between $800 - $1500, you can get a film based Leica M body that ranges anywhere from a good "user" body to a mint M4, M4P or M6 body. For around $1000 you can find a mint 28mm f/2.8 or a mint 50mm
f/2.8 for $500-600. The f/2 Summicron lenses will sell for perhaps 10-20% more.

So for what many people will spend for a midange or "prosumer" digital body and a lens for it, you can get a nice Leica M starter kit.
Also - take a look at the Leica CL and the 40mm f/2 lens made for it.

It's all about knowing where to shop.

Camera West, Sherry Krauter, Tamarkin and B& H photo in NYC are some good places to start.

 

[Jubb Jubb]

Film cameras are mainly about B&W now

What a load of rubbish...

 

[Vincent.G]

All:
Would value your feedback re: Giving Leica a try? quick background re-cameras/me. i'm early 50's with a 25 year old mind, played with film camera's over time: minolta 101/nikon's in art school, slr's, P&S etc. but they are gone except for a Contax Tvs few rolls a month. Only casually shot UNTIL i got a Fuji x100 less than a year ago and find that I am obsessed with it-it has a soul-best money I ever spent. While waiting to see if a XProII is coming being I prefer the Hybrid OVF otherwise I'll get a new XE1. I am an artist, painter/drawings. FYI: in a wheelchair so I am not traveling, shooting mostly very local, at the moment. So back to my question: Start with a film Leica? Used M8 with one decent lens? Being its 2013, some would argue -why spend that kind of money and being its digital now, the fuji's, OMD's are pushing out some incredible images. Is it too late? I am really curious what I am missing on the cameras interaction being the x100 gives me so much pleasure. A friend brought his M6 over and I enjoyed the feel but thats 30 minutes....BTW:I am not rich & realize its not cheap to get into L world but would like to try it, worse case I'll sell it and lose a few bucks....thanks and hope this makes sense...your thoughts?

If you think using a Leica film RF makes you a happier and/or better photographer, go for it! 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

What a load of rubbish...

Not necessarily. I fully see your point, but more and more people use colour for digi and film for B&W. I shoot very little colour film nowadays but still MUCH prefer film for B&W. Leica both ways.

Cheers,

R.

 

[thegman]

All: to update my message from above I have decided to buy a Leica anbd thank you for all of the feed back on this thread-. Been reading about the various M's, and while I decided to go for a M5 if I can find one in good working order but do not care about scuffs etc. (M6 is out of my price range) I think I found one. How does this sound to you: M5 $899 from a leica dealer, 30 day return, 90 day parts and labor. condition they describe as a 8. some scuffs/etc but meter/range finder works.... thanks for the insight- I am way out of my league here...What is your opinion of the M5 and the price?

Never used an M5, although they can split a room in terms of whether they are liked or not. I understand there are some issues with the M5 support of certain lenses which protrude into the camera a lot, as the meter can hit them. I think it's collapsible and some wide angle lenses which have the problem.

The M5 is an interesting camera, for $900 I would have thought an M6 may just about about be in budget though. Looking at UK prices, $900 might be just a tad high for an M5, but if it's got a warranty, and is in nice condition, then maybe the price is right.