Leica SLR or Leica M

<p><em>"As nice as it would be to own a Leica, I really don't see the point, for your purposes. I'm an undergrad photo student too, and I can tell you for sure that I've been happy with my Nikon FE." - </em> Unless you're a poser, of course.. But this comment is dead on.<br>

There's no point in investing in a Leica. You're mostly be better off with an SLR over a rangefinder for your first camera, but I would first stress the fact that you have to own a system you'd be able and want to rat about, take everywhere, abuse, shoot in the rain and in dark alleys...</p>

<p>Let's also clear up some confusion over definitions. Street photography and travel aren't photojournalism. Photojournalism is news photography for timely publication in newspapers, news magazines, and (increasingly) news websites. Film won't cut it here - if you want a job as a photojournalist these days you're going to need a digital SLR along with a digital video camera and at least a basic working knowledge of Final Cut Pro. Digital SLRs from Canon and Nikon are king in this field due to speed, reliability, versatility, low light performance, professional support, and now - you guessed it - built in HD video.</p>

<p>If that's not your actual area of interest and you just want to do street and travel, then film is fine.</p>

<p>"Unless you're a poser, of course"<br>

Well, yes, there is always that possibility.</p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Go up to eBay or to KEH. Do a search for Pentax K1000 or ME or Super. They're less than a $100. Built like a tank and there's a ton load of quality used lenses for sale as folks jump ship to the big brands because they want something "professional".<br>

Then use the thousands of dollars or so that you save from <strong>not </strong> buying a Leica and go buy film and <strong><em>network</em> </strong> (ex. take editors out to lunch)<strong> </strong> , because a degree isn't enough. It's who you know. And while you're networking, start shooting and try to <strong>get published</strong> . Take your camera with you at all times and if you hear sirens on the way to class, skip class and go take photos. You'll learn much more from that experience than you ever will in a classroom.<br>

Take writing classes too. Writers are having to do more and more of their own photography and vice versa.<br>

You may want a back up career that's not so competitive - like movie star.</p>

<p>Good Luck.<br>

That's all I have to say.</p>

<p>Marvellous how when you come to a Leica forum everyone tells you not to buy a Leica. Leica R stuff is not so expensive s/h - it depends on what you buy. A Leicaflex SL and any version Summicron R would probably cost you a max of $500. It all depends on your budget. A ver 1 28mm and 90mm f2.8 or pre ASPH Summicron also will not cost so much either. Of course a Nikon or a Pentax will be cheaper, but then he is interested in the mythos of the brand - nothing wrong with that. Also it is by no means obvious that their equivalent 50mm lenses will be "the same" as a Leica at all. Similar yes, but not the same.</p>

<p>"but then he is interested in the mythos of the brand - nothing wrong with that."<br>

I would disagree, especially for a student. It's just not practical to invest in something just because you like the idea of it.</p>

<p>After reading all of the posts here it is difficult see where, in sum, any useful information has been provided to the fellow who posted the inquiry.</p>

<p>Lots of opinions, a similar quantity of bias, and no insight for the fellow who was seeking advice.</p>

<p>There is a good reason why even in these hallowed halls of the Leica forum people are advising against the Leica for Elliot, it's because it's good sound advice both practicaly and financialy.<br>

Anyone has who suggests a 50mm lens for photojournalism has never been one and has no understanding of the job, I would say that about 75% of photojournalism could be covered with a 35mm or 28mm lens but not a 50mm. I think all the hot air about the specialness of Leica glass counts for nought if your $1000 Summicron just won't get the job done, either you can't get far enough back or close enough in. Surely it makes more sense to buy two bodies 3 or 4 lenses for the price of a Leica any way you slice it. Elliot do yourself a favor don't buy in to the myth. The camera and the lens are just part of the equation not the solution.</p>

<p> Obviously the Leica M camera will not meet your needs forever. Photojournalism is now shot with digital camera's. But any digital camera you purchase now will be of no use later as the technology changes quite rapidly. You love film and your a student. Just get the camera you want to own. I would buy the Leica M because for one thing it will hold it's value and they are reliable, beautiful and the glass is awesome. So then what to buy. Well you could buy a M6, M6ttl, M7 or MP. If you cannot afford one of those models then look to the Zeiss Ikon which has a M mount body. The Bessa apparently is not getting rave reviews for reliability. That's about it. Of course if you cannot afford all that then you might consider a F100 and a couple prime lenses for about $500.00 total. The F100 is one of the very best deals in film photography these days. </p>

<p>Both systems are excellent. Have you used a rangefinder body? If not, be aware that it is quite different. It took me a few years to get used to them, and I missed plenty of good pictures because I didn't have it down yet. So a reflex might be a good idea. And, as mentioned above, they cost less. For another camera I would suggest one of the less expensive Nikons, such as an FM2 or 3. The older Nikon lenses aren't great though, but they have improved in recent years. Personally I have 2 Leicas, but recently have preferred the FM3 with Zeiss lenses.</p>

<p>Whatever you get, I would recommend that you get a system where you can use your lenses on bot film and digital bodies. You can do this with Leica M, Nikon, Pentax, and some others. Canon I'm not so sure, as they have changed the mount many times. The great thing about Leica M and Nikon is that you can use all the old film lenses on digital cameras.</p>

<p>If I were starting out, I'd get a Nikon FM3a and a 50/1.8 or a 45/2.8P lens. But then, the seduction of a Leica M is hard to resist. Many have fallen to the charms.</p>

<p>there are cheaper ways of getting into both rangefinder and slr. you are into leica for the lenses. get a bessa r based body, the later models that take m lenses. then buy your sumicron f/2. now spend next to nothing on picking up a working old slr from the likes of olumpus, minolta or pentax. the prices are lower but you get fantastic old optics. so it should suit your budget.</p>

<p>Elliot, if you are required to bring a film camera, I bet they also specified a manual film camera. I expect most all your fellow students will show up with a student camera. Most will be Nikon or Cannon, perhaps someone will choose a Pentax and someone else an old Olympus, perhaps even a Minolta or a Konica will show up. The one thing they will have in common is they will be SLRs. Don't get me wrong I love rangefinders, to my eye they generally out perform the SLRs at anything wider than 50mm, but they are a specialized instrument. As others mentioned for tele or macro they don't cut it, nor are they as filter friendly as SLRs. Check out the work around polarizers sometime. As a student you certainly don't need to spend Leica money when you can do very very well for about 90% less and have a camera that can do more. I would cheap out for now and keep my money for what surely will come along that requires it. The Leica stuff is not going anywhere and goodness knows most of it is not getting worn out. You will have ample chance later in life to play with all the Leica gear your heart can desire. The real truth is your creativity, skill and composition is at least 90% of a photograph, the box and the glass you capture it with is maybe 10% and unless you show up with a disposable or cheap point and shoot zoom you are likely to earn the most of the the 10 points available to the box and glass. One last point is you will cry like a baby if something bad happens to your M rig. I sometimes choose a different box and glass just not to have to worry about my M gear. Hope this helps. I think you got a bunch of good advice from most everyone. Good luck, Bob</p>

<p>Most schools require a basic slr with 50mm lens or at least one with full manual capabilites. Since you are going to school to learn something, you will do that by exhausting all the capabilities of the most basic equipment. Get an inexpensive SLR for school, get the Leica M for yourself.</p>

<p>Elliot, if you are required to bring a film camera, I bet they also specified a manual film camera. I expect most all your fellow students will show up with a student camera. Most will be Nikon or Cannon, perhaps someone will choose a Pentax and someone else an old Olympus, perhaps even a Minolta or a Konica will show up. The one thing they will have in common is they will be SLRs. Don't get me wrong I love rangefinders, to my eye they generally out perform the SLRs at anything wider than 50mm, but they are a specialized instrument. As others mentioned for tele or macro they don't cut it, nor are they as filter friendly as SLRs. Check out the work around polarizers sometime. As a student you certainly don't need to spend Leica money when you can do very very well for about 90% less and have a camera that can do more. I would cheap out for now and keep my money for what surely will come along that requires it. The Leica stuff is not going anywhere and goodness knows most of it is not getting worn out. You will have ample chance later in life to play with all the Leica gear your heart can desire. The real truth is your creativity, skill and composition is at least 90% of a photograph, the box and the glass you capture it with is maybe 10% and unless you show up with a disposable or cheap point and shoot zoom you are likely to earn the most of the the 10 points available to the box and glass. One last point is you will cry like a baby if something bad happens to your M rig. I sometimes choose a different box and glass just not to have to worry about my M gear. Hope this helps. I think you got a bunch of good advice from most everyone. Good luck, Bob</p>

<p>I think that college is a time to have fun and experiment rather than to place onesef in single-minded career mode. If the guy wants to use a Leica, why shouldn't he?</p>

<p>He took the time to frame his question properly and to be quite clear about what he was asking. Why is it that a good number of people think that this is an invitation to spout off about anything and everything, most of it based on the premise that he doesn't know what he is talking about :)</p>

<p>And why is it that evey time somebody asks about buying a Leica, there is a chorus of people, on this of all fora, telling him or her not to do it :)</p>

<p>Elliot, there's a current thread entitled Rangefinder Daydreams that you may find useful in working through your decision.</p>

<p>Also, in light of some of what has been said above, I'd like to suggest that you have a look at the posts of a photo.net member named Noah Addis. He is an accomplished photojournalist - and more - who has from time to time had refreshing things to say in the face of the wisdom about photojournalism imparted on this site by people who don't practise it. In particular, you will find a thread, during which a student was told to forget about film, etc, etc, to which Mr. Addis made some insightful contributions, including on the use by people who are learning of Leica cameras. He also has a web site well worth a visit at www.noahaddis.com</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Leica M6 Classic w/35mm f2.0 (v. 4 if at all possible). A 35mm lens is for street work which is what you will end up shooting anyway. When you learn to print you will crop. You will not need to go for the f1.4. Remember B&W has 2 stop leeway and if the meter reads negative press the button; one stop is nothing with tri-X. Your second lens should be a portrait lens. I'd recommend the 75mm f2.5 Summarit. Try and find a demo. It is extremely sharp and is coded for the digital. The 90mm f2.8 tele-elmarit is softer (dreamer affect) and can be had for much less. The M6 can always be sold while the lenses will work with the M9. If you need a digital...remember whatever you will buy will be outdated before you graduate so don't spend much on it. Get the basic SLR. I am certain that you will need one of each.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the guy wants to use a Leica, why shouldn't he?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Because he said he's on a budget, and once you factor in the cost of parts and repairs of a budget-priced Leica that's been smoked, how much money will be left for things like film and books, both of which will do a lot more for his photography than an elite brand of gear?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>He took the time to frame his question properly and to be quite clear about what he was asking. Why is it that a good number of people think that this is an invitation to spout off about anything and everything, most of it based on the premise that he doesn't know what he is talking about :)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not so much a premise, but he did say "street and travel photography (Photojournalism)", when photojournalism is neither of those. Maybe he intended to say "street and travel photography, and photojournalism"? Until he clarifies that, I'm inclined to believe he doesn't understand the difference. I'm more than happy to stand corrected, if I am mistaken.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Also, in light of some of what has been said above, I'd like to suggest that you have a look at the posts of a photo.net member named Noah Addis. He is an accomplished photojournalist -</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Again - OP apparently said he was interested in street and travel, thinking those are photojournalism. They aren't, yet everyone, including you, jumped on the word "photojournalism" when it was used in error. This entire thread is a classic case of the blind leading the deaf.</p>

<p>Go online to KEH, Camerawest, George Ury, or another vendor with a reputation for honesty and fair dealing. Call and ask if they have a "user" M2, M3, or M4-P that can be CLA'd into reliable condition without major repairs. (An M4 "original" or an M6 would probably be too expensive.) Then get the camera CLA'd by Sherry Krauter, Don A. Goldberg, or one of the other Leica experts. Put on a post-1960 Summicron 50mm with a hood. Get a light meter. You're done. Have fun. </p>

<p>This all comes down to what you want and what you need. If you really want a Leica and have the $$ by all means get one. Love to have one myself. You don't need a Leica for your purpose though. Any of the SLR's listed above will do a fine job for far less money.</p>

<p>Elliot, if you don't have the money for it, save the Leica for later. Get a cheap good quality SLR.<br>

I had a Yashica FX-3 with a 50mm f/1.7 and it was amazing. I took some of the best shots with that rig. Even after I got a Nikon FM2 and a Leica M2, I still haven't taken a shot as good as the ones I used to take with my FX-3. <br>

Frankly, I would get a cheap alternative SLR for school. If you're doing photography, any good program will have you use SLR's and medium format cameras. So you need the money for both those cameras. Save up for your Leica.<br>

If you have the cash to spend, then by all means go for it. But you need to know it won't make you a better photographer. The better option is to save up, and go for something more student based because you'll have more money for supplies, AND BEER.<br>

A good student camera should be basic, cheap, and well-built. The Yashica FX-3 is a GREAT choice. So is the Pentax Spotmatic/K-1000. Nikon is also a great choice because they have the same mount on their film and digital cameras. I have two AI lenses that were made for film that I can use on my dSLR. Its not the most practical combo, but it works, and it helps out a lot when I'm shooting in a studio environment. <br>

As for your question: I have a Leica R6 and an M2. I prefer the M2 because the R6 is HUGE and heavy. The R4 is slightly smaller. Than being said though, they're extremely well built, and pretty quiet compared to other cameras. Its fantastic non the less.<br>

The M2 is a stripped down version of the M3. It has fewer frame lines and a non-rewinding film counter. Both cameras don't have a light meter, which is a MUST for a student at first. You can always buy an external meter so its not a major issue. The M6 has a built-in meter and has great quality build. Really choose between those three models. Try to avoid the M4/5 because one is expensive, and the other doesn't have the same build quality. <br>

Best of luck and let us know what you decide on.</p>

<p>i worked in a college photo lab for a few years, and in all that time, only one student i met used a rangefinder for the assignments, and he'd been taking photo before he started at my school. due to the nature of some photographic assignments, i'd definitely recommend an slr. leica makes great cameras, and there is something about the images that captured through those lenses. however, since you have said nothing about prior experience in photography, i don't know where you might stand as far as technique is concerned, and i believe that it takes experience, and concrete technique to really get an appreciable difference out of gear like that.</p>

<p>as for recommendations on cheaper slr's, nikon, minolta, pentax, canon (and many less-known brands) make great offerings. i picked up a canon ft-b from a pawn shop for $15 with a 50mm f/1.4 lens, which is possibly the nicest lens i've ever owned, and they sell for very cheap, even on a site like keh.com. i personally favor the minolta x-series slr kit. they take modern batteries, where many of the older kits take banned mercury cell batteries, for which there is no real great alternative on the market, to my knowledge. the bodies, and lenses are cheap & plentiful, and the quality is more than sufficient for just about anyone.</p>

<p>my personal experience in college photo began with a 35mm canon w/a 50mm lens, which i used until i could frame shots without even needing to look into the viewfinder. i then moved on to medium format, and later large format, all of which i still use. i would encourage anyone to try out as many setups as they can afford.</p>

<p>the single most useful tool for me was a good tripod. for me, it really paid to take the time to get used to lugging one of these around, and setting it up. a tripod will help you get much sharper photos in many situations, and it also opens up many creative possibilities that are impossible, or difficult to achieve without one.</p>

<p>you can drop a wad of cash on a single camera, and lens, but leicas will be around for longer than you, or me, and they can be had at any time. unless you're loaded, and/or decently experienced already, i'd recommend getting a cheaper slr, a few lenses, and a decent tripod... not all at once. start with 1 lens, and you will know when it's time to add to your collection.</p>

<p>you're in for some great times, and i wish you the best in your education experience.</p>

<p>I used an M6 and R5 during a month in the Czech Repulic recently: each showed its strengths and weaknesses. For close work and telephoto, where where I needed to manage the d-o-f closely, the SLR won 'hands down'. When pre-focussing / hyperfocal focussing and uncomplicated metering was possible, it was the M6. As a carry-around camera, with just one lens, the M6+35/2 could (and does) satisfy my needs most of the time. Conversely, having AE on the SLR was also a great benefit at times. Such trade-offs are largely unquantifiable.</p>

<p>On balance, I feel that the sheer flexibility - aside from cost - offered by a SLR makes it the best system overall, especially for slides (use of polarizers, for example). And sometimes I just need a zoom lens, regardless of any image quality compromises that may ensue. Hence, my M cameras are mostly dedicated to B+W, where cropping and subsequent processing is easier than with slides.</p>

<p>I would almost say that <em>any SLR </em> system could do the same job as a Leica SLR, except for the quality of Leica lenses. In Czech I mostly used a 35/2,8 Elmarit, with a 50/2 & 90/2 Summicron as second choices. These are excellent lenses, both in imaging and handling terms and there were many instances where I just <em>couldn't be bothered</em> to use the slightly more fiddly M6.</p>

<p>On a previous trip to Slovenia my M6 was unused for 4 weeks! However, my Nikon F5 (and FE2) were in constant use, not least because of the F5's brilliant spot and matrix metering and autobracketing. These features, and the ease of use with zooms and telephoto lenses, are a real boon in many very tricky conditions - but the F5 is big and <em>very </em> heavy. Clearly, for compactness it's difficult to beat an M plus a couple of lenses. For example, my M6 + 21mm Skopar M is <em>much </em> smaller than an R5 + 21mm Super Angulon. .....</p>

<p>" Horses for courses".</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi Elliot,<br>

I have just come from the Leica M experience. Here are some tips that may help your decision. </p>

<p>As everyone says, the M is a great camera. I had an M4. The one thing that did get to me was carrying a light meter (you would want the M6 or M7 for metering)....I like having the meter on camera, I felt like it gave me more control to exactly where I was metering from, especially from a distance. But there is no doubt that the M lenses are amazing.<br>

If you do decide on the M route, you may want to look at the Zeiss Ikon, Voigtlander, Minolta CLE or Konica Hexar. Apparently the view finder is very bright on the Zeiss and it will take all M lenses - remember the body is just a box for the lenses. The lensese are what matters.<br>

When you go the SLR route, you definitely have more options. In school you will probably be doing some flash work, and SLR are very handy when it comes to flash, as well as shooting wide to telephoto.<br>

If you decide on the SLR route, check out the <strong>Olympus OM</strong> line. I just sold my Leica M4 and two old lenses for $1500, and bought a Olympus OM-2 with a 50 f1.8 and a 28 f3.5 for a total of $150! They are as sharp and as amazing as Leica! I am completely impressed with the Olympus. It's small (like Leica), lightweight, and easy to handle. With the sharpness of a Leica ( Zuiko lenses) and handiness of an SLR. The don't have the Leica 'look' that I had with the 50mm summicron - but I found the 35mm summiron was ok, but not the same as the 50mm.<br>

Remember, the M is a great line, but it does have some restrictions. And being in a photo program will need to have a camera with some diversity - flash, wide, tele......</p>

<p>Good luck<br>

Matt</p>

<p>Get a Leica M rangefinder with 35mm lens.</p>

<p>Plenty of folks would just shrug and say that Canon, Konica, Zenit, etc can be just as good, well except they aren't (*). There is no point whatsoever in taking an obsoleted film SLR, as you will have probably to use a DSLR as part of curriculum anyway. Get the advantage of experience using the best direct viewfinder camera out there instead.<br>

* Dear Spotkorrflex enthusiasts, sorry for offending you with the notion that Leica RFs are the best, here at Leica and Rangefinder forum. Flame on.</p>