what is special about leica M?

There is nothing really "special" about the Leica M. It is, in fact, a somewhat finiky camera, requiring more maintainence than other analog cameras and as many [if not more] truly execrable photographs have been with it than with any other kind of camera. Still, there is a certain je ne sais quoi about the Leica that even the minimally talented photographer can appreciate and value. That is why we spend so much time on forums like this one. Perhaps more of my most valued photographs have been made with lesser cameras than the M6 but I don't think I would want to spend much time talking or reading about, say, the Olympus Stylus Epic. When it comes to Leica, it is not really about the pictures.

Stanley,

I just posted some <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?

folder_id=621466">infrared examples</a>. These are a mix of Kodak HIE and Maco 820,

plus I also included a comparison shot using the Nikon D100 I had converted.

As to the special-ness of the Leica M bodies, if your passion for photography is most compatible with a shooting style that is facilitated best with a fully manual rangefinder, then your choice of camera is automatically reduced to about 5% (guess?) of the cameras made. In spite of the other worthy choices in a manual rangefinder that needs batteries only for the meter (M5 on), the Leica M is the best built, most versatile, and ironically the most modern of that very specialized type of camera. Furthermore, with the M mount, you have a huge choice of lenses including 70 year old classics and some of the best modern lenses that are current and serviceable into the foreseeable future and still new lenses coming out. The only existing competition is from Cosina Zeiss ZM and Cosina Voigtlander, which are simply not as well crafted and do not have an extensive used market that enables you to buy good used Leica gear and get out if you want or need to for very little loss.

Brad, it's good to see you here again today. As for the towel snapping in the shower? Real Leica M shooters NEVER shower! Since our cameras are so reliable we never break out in a sweat wondering if our pictures will come out OK, even though there's no way to chimp the back of an M camera to check. Those guys were jerkin' your chain! They just wanted to get you in the shower to see you naked. Hope you had fun.

Stan, if you love Contax and if Contax gives you what you want, stick with it. When I properly got into photography in the early 1960s, the local Leica Man took me under his wing, not the local Contax Man. Had it been the other way around, I doubt that it would have made a difference. There's no "best" camera: all depends on what you want out of your instrument and on your resources. It's true, though, that Leicas have stood the test of time better than Contaxes have. Zeiss aimed for sophistication, which led to complexity. Leitz, by contrast, kept things simple. That's about the mechanical side. In optics, Zeiss were arguably ahead until the 1950s. They still hold their own there. Hasselblad, for example, don't use Leitz lenses, do they? One shouldn't sneeze at Schneider either.

Brad,

 

In truth, Leica M membership is a part of a secret society, and I wasn't aware that you had attended one of the initiation ceremonies, unless you are now an M user.

The Leica M is similar to a Rolls Royce: They are both hand built using the finest in 1950s

technology.

In the beginning Hasselblad used Kodak Ektars, some great glass in it's day!

Thank you all!

I just wanted to hear you subjective opinion... I think that subjective opinions are the most correct (in photography). Frequently tests would not show a real character of a lens/camera...

 

It appears that every one likes Leica, I just can not figure out why (especially after my poor experience with CM).

 

I don't have any friends with leicas (eviry one now is digital..), so I don't want to get in a situation when I have to put a essentially brand new camera on Ebay (it happened with Oly film and digital and leica CM).

 

I love Contax and I'll keep it (N1, ND, G2, 645)

I may buy leica just because it is supposed to be "the best camera". Definitely, Leica will not make me a better photographer..)

Thanks again.

<I>"It appears that every one likes Leica,"</I>

<P>

Then you're confused about the meaning of the word "likes" (and this is the Leica forum), step outside into the real world and the wind blows even harder...

Since no one is reading this anymore, (^O^), perhaps I'll try to give my thoughts on this.

 

There is nothing special about a Leica M, or any Leica. They are simply very solidly built rangefinder camera whose history goes back to the early 20th century. I believe they were the first "35mm" film cameras, which radically changed the direction of photography.

 

I enjoy using these cameras because there is a connection with this history, but that's just me. I enjoy using any working vintage camera. It's a challenge to see what I can do with them.

 

On the plus side, a Leica is a finely crafted camera, often hand made, and, with proper care, they will endure until our Sun explodes.

 

The shutter is almost totally silent, they are small and not seen as an "attack weapon," and are objects of art as well. Many of the older lenses (not all) are wonderful and produce images with a feel that's a bit different than what is produced with current optics.

 

On the down-side is this:

 

Leica cameras are very difficult and slow regarding film loading. I say this if you are doing fast work, such as weddings. If you use a flash bracket, you need to remove everything to change film.

 

To say that Leica lenses are flawless is also false. There are some that are excellent and some that are awful. I use a Canon 100mm Serenar on my M2, but would like to get a nice Elmar 90mm f/4. It has a bit softer feel to it. My Canon Serenar is extremely sharp, but often I want a lens that is a bit more mellow, and I understand that the Elmar 90mm will do the job. So, Leica optics are not always the "best," whatever that means.

 

I'm also talking vintage Leica here. Not the newer ASPH optics.

 

If you have eyesight issues, a rangefinder can be a real problem. I have some vision issues, but my M2 is bright and clear and I can focus Ok, but, not as fast as an AF lens...duh. However, with the Leicas, I can prefocus, and do not suffer from AF focus lag! I had a major problem with AF lag at a wedding last week using digital.

 

Some of the older LTM versions are nearly impossible to focus.

 

I enjoy the zoom lenses on my SLR digitals. Changing lenses on a Leica can be time consuming, and not every lens fits every situation.

 

Close-up and macro photography is almost impossible with a Leica, or with any other rangefinder. I love such photography and use my digitals for that.

 

What I'm saying is this: The Leica has an honored place in the history of photography and is one of the finest cameras ever built, but it does not suit every situation or every person.

 

There are many fine comeras on the market, and each person needs to match the tool with the job.

.....because it is very, very simple and it becomes an extention of your eyes and your

hands and you don't have to think about how to use it, it just becomes second nature. It

becomes part of your body and your mind. And then the incredible clarity and rendition of

textures of the lenses. Nothing like it......the lenses make a VISIBLE difference. I use Nikon

and xPan and other stuff. But nothing renders like the Leica lenses. I'ts not about

sharpness per se, it's more than sharpness. It's a sort of incredible clarity. Nuff said.

...I tired the Contax. Too hard to control it.

Quite right, Al. That was when Hasselblads had only focal plane shutters. Once they added between lens ones, Ektars went. Pablo has said something I intended to say: that any mechanically and optically good camera which comes to be used almost without thought, is the best. For each user, a different best. That so many have stuck with Leicas over the decades speaks for their usability and dependability. But others have stuck with Rolleiflexes, Hasselblads, Nikons, Canons...

Pablito, if that name is not a diminutive of Pablo, my apologies.

>Brad - , jul 14, 2006; 12:21 a.m.

 

>Membership... And the wacky towel-snapping antics after the group showers. An

unexpected bonus...

 

Yeah, and it attracts losers--who don't own one or plan to own one--who cannot stand to be

away from the forum for even the smallest amount of time. Kind of like a parasite.

optics, durability, mechanical perfection, whatever.

 

Think those few words have nailed most Leica USERS thoughts.Of course then you can add.....

 

Boutique product for fondlers and those with some sort of inferiority/superiority complex.Of course Leica recognise this and charge a premium for the brand name.Leica D-Lux 2 same camera as the Panasonic Lumix LX1 version but double the price.

Better shutter than the Kodak Ektra, but less RF accuracy. More lenses available than the Ektra, but no swapping of magazines mid roll. Combo RF and viewfinder, but no zoom finder like the Ektra. Downside, No protective ring that protects the lenses focus cam surface like the Ektra. <BR><BR>Allows usage of the giant world of LTM lenses<BR><BR>

In looking at the contributors to this thread, there are a few people with the prolific poster icon beside their name that profess to owning Leica Ms, but cannot afford the paltry $25 to become a financial member of the forum they feel so protective about. Oh, are they the Leica M 'Users' or merely starving artists?

What's Special about a Leica?

 

Nothing, if you are talking about the m7 and beyond, except that now that CV is making lenses you have a lot of lens options.

 

The fully mechanical M Leicas, m4 and earlier, remain stoutly made, precise all mechanical instruments that never run out of batteries. They give you a huge range of excellent optics.

 

Thats about it, actually. In spite of all the ink to the contrary, I've never seen the leica glow or felt my photos benefited in any substantial way from using, say, a Nikon F.

<i><blockquote> Real Leica M shooters NEVER shower! </blockquote> </i><p>

 

Al lives alone, if I recall.

Well, .[.Z, actually my cat lives here too on a full time basis. The young ladies, on the other hand, are only allowed to spend one night at a time, and not more often than once a week. I don't do the scheduling. I let them haggle it out amongst themselves. As for my showering? The first and the fifteenth of the month like clockwork!

Explains a lot.