If there had never been a Leica, which camera would you...

I'd have spent the $$ on an OM-4T of course. Black. Totally a-historical answer since Olympus is to Leica what Rock Music is to Rhythm and Blues. No Ms=no OMs.

 

Rollei TLR is the perfect historical answer.

 

For a modern rangefinder, the Fuji 6x9s look tempting and lovely.

From a historical point of view, Leica was the camera which started

35mm photography. There was 24x36mm format before Leica, but it was

not sucessful<p>

If there was no Leica, there would not be any Contax RF, Canon 35,

Nikon 35, or Canon EOS. The whole 35mm species would not exist.<p>

 

What would be the camera most likey taking Leica's place ?<p>

 

IMO, that one camera got to be Ermanox.<p>

Modern photojournalism was invented by Solomon, with his

Ermanox camera with a fast f/1.8 lens<p>

Alfred Eisenstaedt also began his photojournalist career with

an Ermanox camera in 1928.<p>

He discovered Leica in 1930. If there was no Leica, Eisenstaedt

probably would continued using his Ermanox for Life magazine.

<p>

As several folks have pointed out, IF Leica had not come to be - most, if not all, 35mm

cams wouldn't exist today. Martin Tai pointed to another fast, and relatively small

camera of that era; the Ermanox. However, here in the US, the Ermanox was uncommon

and I'm guessing difficult to acquire. If I'd been around then I might have "gone for" a

Rolleiflex, 2x3 Speed Graphic, or a Zeiss Super Ikonta. In particular, the Super Ikonta was

small and lightweight. Especially when you consider the big 6x6 neg it made. Also, the

Zeiss lenses were better anything else available at the time.

It is possible that if Leica hadn't developed 35mm that no one else would have, but who knows whether someone else would have come up with the idea. Many ideas seem to emerge when they reach their time.

 

Assuming no Leica= no 35mm, then the Rollei TLR wins every time for me. As great as Leicas are, I still think Rolleis have the edge for many applications. One of the limitations of the Rollei is the viewing system, but practice helps to solve this one, as does the non optical, eye level viewer.

 

Another observation I have made is that is that Rollei repair/service work costs a fraction of that of the average M Leica CLA.

35mm film already existed when Leica came around. It was used for motion pictures. In fact, the first, very first 1911 Leica was a small box designed to "test" this film, and in the hands of Oskar Barnack it became the little box so revered among us today.

Andy said: <i>It is possible that if Leica hadn't developed 35mm that no one else would have, but who knows whether someone else would have come up with the idea. Many ideas seem to emerge when they reach their time. </i> I agree, I'm sure some inventor would have done so.

 

<br><br>As for me, if Leica didn't exist I'd probably still be using Olympus OM. I used OM for 20 years but ditched it when I changed to Leica, having suddenly realized what <b>really good</b> cameras and lenses are like.

Goerz Berlin Tenax is also terrific<p>

<center>

<img src="http://www.photo.net/bboard/image?bboard_upload_id=14327384"border=10><P>

Compur shutter, Goerz Dogmar 100mm f/4.5 lens.</center>

Long before any 35mm format or movie format exist, there was already

8x11mm format<p>

 

1838, Daguerrotype process was invented.<p>

Soon afterward (1940 ?) a professor of physics at university of

Munich , Carl August von Steinheil invented a daguerrotype camera

making 8x11mm format image on polished silver coin <p>

 

Minox 8x11 format had its deep root in the very early beginning

of photography, almost as early as photography itself.<p>

 

8x11 format is half a century older than 24x36 format.<p>

8x11mm foramt is the longest surviving format to date, more than

150 years old.

a plaubel makina 67 -- although i've never owned one i do like how that camera goes about its business!

i have been keeping my eye on this one: a contax 645. zeiss. autofocus. medium format. slr. kind of the opposite of my little leica, but you asked! the real reason is that whenever i look at a modern slr i just think they're too dang big for the dinky little neg you get -- why not shoot medium format compared to a canon? and the 80mm f2 planar is a really good lens. add the 45mm 2.8 and you're done.<br />but when low light beckons, i'd get a contax aria with a 35mm f1.4 distagon, that is a good setup when lit by candles.