Am I Insane?

<p>I went through this a few months back, so I can relate my experience, which I am not sure it will apply to you.<br /> <br /> <br /> I have been in love with Leicas, ever since I saw an M5 resting inside a glass display in Frankfurt airport, back in ... God I do not remember when, around the time the M5 was introduced. I almost left my credit card at the shot there, to get it, but eventually the risk of an imminent divorce upon my return home, stopped me.<br /> <br /> <br /> In the years following that, I went from an avid amateur photographer to a "Japanese tourist" (no offense for our Japanese friends here), I sold me Nikon F3 and the Nikkors, got myself a Sony P&S and took only family pictures, nothing to write home about. Even when I got a Nikon D80 for the needs of my work, I still had no interest in taking "real" pictures.<br /> <br /> <br /> Fast forward to last summer, when some friends re-ignited the old passion in me. Soon, I've acquired my first love again (a pristine, Nikon F2A) and several Nikkor prime lenses etc. At that time, I thought I should also invest in my unfulfilled love, a Leica. A mint Leica M6 fall in my hands, together with 3 lenses. I was so happy that my dream finally became a reality, I spend hours looking at the beautiful M6 and playing with it. I wanted to love that camera, I wanted to get fine pictures with it, I wanted to use it as much as possible. I was finally able to shoot the dream of my youth. I loaded it with Tri-X and waited for the opportunity to take the first pictures. Like so many other dreams though, this wasn't meant to be.<br /> <br /> Being used to the Nikkors, I found that the position of the controls on Leica lenses to be totally non-intuitive. It took me for ever to adjust the camera to shoot a picture. I wanted to focus the lens and I was changing the aperture, I wanted to change the aperture and I was changing the focus. The rangefinder proved to be a pain to use too. The M6 shows two frame lines inside the viewfinder. I had to remember what lens I had on the camera and to remember which set of frame lines corresponded to the lens I had installed, before I could decide which frame lines to use. All these problems made my shooting less intuitive, less spontaneous, too slow. My 7 years old sons didn't had the patience to wait for me to adjust the camera to take their pictures. After fighting for a couple of months between my wish to love (and get used to) the Leica and my probelms with the adjustments, I decided that I had enough.<br /> <br /> <br /> There was no reason for me to have a couple of thousand Euros invested in something that I couldn't use effectively. There was no reason to fight the camera. I ended up selling the M6 and buying a Nikon F5, which I could use with my eyes closed.<br /> <br /> <br /> I didn't regret selling the Leica, it just was not the right camera for me. I suppose that if I was to select today between a Leica M6 and a Nikon FE or FE2, I would go with the later, and save myself a few €€€€€€. I already have the lenses for it, so why bother switching to a different system?<br /> <br /> <br /> Again, that may or may not happen with you, but I thought it would be worthwhile to narrate my experience.</p>

I agree with Robin, although you might not even have to get a meter if you shoot enough and process quickly enough to remember your lighting conditions. But no, you're definitely not insane. Go for it. I think you'll like a Leica.

Kevin,

I find myself in the same camp as you...tempted by the Leica. I currently own the FM3A and the Bessa R2A, but I am

thinking of selling the latter to finance (part of) an M7. The Bessa is nice and compact, but as several of the other

commenters have noted, you may as well go for the Leica, because you'll be eyeing it until you're holding it! I am also

intrigued by the Zeiss Ikon, and its viewfinder is supposedly as good if not better than any of the M's. One thing which,

depending on what you shoot, might shift your sights to an M7 over an M6 is the aperture priority of the M7. I do a lot of

street shooting and for me that feature might be the difference between getting the shot or fiddling with the controls and

missing it by a second. Maybe I just need to work on my technique :)

 

Good luck, and if you are insane, then I confess I am right there with you. And happy about it.

<p>Unless you want to spend a great deal of money and go back to manual everything, I'd get a Contax G2. Years ago I needed to go smaller and lighter than a set of Nikon F3HPs and went to buy an M6. By the time I priced everything, held cameras in hand and thought about my uses, the Leica desire was gone and I bought the G2s. Until film became too expensive for me (Kodachrome 25 and later Velvia addict), I never picked up the F3s for anything except macro work. The Zeiss lenses rival Leica at a fraction of the cost. The big downside is that with the Leica you can later get a digital body for all the expensive lenses. with the Contax you're with film forever.</p>

<p>Hi Kevin:<br>

The m7 is a good camera that automatically sets exposure. All Leica lenses are superb - the 35mm Summicron is very useful.<br>

The camera is a joy to use.</p>

<p>Joe Faust</p>

<p>The difference between a viewfinder and through the lens view is overrated. The only practical difference is accuracy in framing and assessing DOF, which is something you soon get used to. I find myself switching between different formats (120/135), frame sizes (6x6/6x7/3x2) and viewfinder types (WLF, SLR, RF) all the time, often in the course of the same shoot. It's not difficult, so I really don't think you're 'asking for trouble'. Anyway, the image you want to worry about is the one in your head, not the one in the lens. You may find that how you see it through the camera isn't significant.</p>

<p>An M6 is a good starting point. New enough to be in good condition; old enough for good prices; built in meter so you can concentrate on the rangefinder experience rather than the handheld lightmeter.</p>

<p>I wouldn't say getting a film Leica is insane. It's something every photographer should try at least once, in my opinion. And if you change your mind later you can sell it for the same price you bought it, which isn't always true of other cameras.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Are you insane?<br>

Yes, you are (of course that's just my opinion). You can try out many great rangefinders with a very small cost. Following is just a short list of great rangefinders that you should try. I list them just so you can easily find a couple of them in your local thrift shop, goodwill, craigslists...:<br>

Kodak Signet<br>

Kodak Retina IIa (Prewar version)<br>

Yashica Lynx 5000 (5000E)<br>

Yashica Lynx 14 (14E)<br>

Yashica Electro 35 (GT, GSN)<br>

Petri 7s (with 1:1.8 lens)<br>

Konica C35<br>

Olympus XA<br>

Minolta AL-F<br>

and old faithful Argus C3 (known as the brick). The good thing about this camera is that it is so simple and easy to take a part and to put back together so you can see what a rangefinder is, how it works and how to adjust it. This camera also has interchangable lenses<br>

Most of these cameras already have a meter which saves you the cost of a hand-held meter. I have had and tried out all the above cameras. They all gave amazing pictures compared to my Nikon F3, F4, Canon New F1, and Minolta XK (of course also my opinion). My argus C3 was made in 1939 (according to some research on line) with 10 shutter speeds dial.<br>

Hope you'll find some of these soon</p>

<p>Jim Powers wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My advice is the same for anyone who asks about RF's. Once you start asking, it's inevitable. The mysterious lure of the Leica has you. Buy a Leica M6 and get it out of your system. You may hate it, but no number of words here will make any difference. And forget starting with an FSU or old Canon RF. It's the "Leica" that is calling to you. Just buy the Leica and get it over with. ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree with this. I'd add that while the amount of money you have tied up in a Leica will be higher than if you buy a cheap fixed-lens rangefinder, you certainly won't <em>lose </em> any more money if you decide it's not for you and sell it-- and you won't really know if RF is for you until (as Jim wrote) you try a Leica. Get the M6.</p>

<p>Best buy in photography right now is a used M6. Can't figure it out, why they are going for 950 to 1200. Buy from Keh or other reputable dealer. After shooting Nikons for 8 years I bought a M6 new in 1990. 2 cla's in 20 years and the camera is the best I have ever used. Best photography decision I ever made. However, I had to commit to the switch. I didn't touch the Nikons for a year which is the amount of time it took me to get as fast with the leica as I was with the Nikon. Now, shooting the Leica M is much faster than a NiKon slr. I shoot 95% street with 35mm cameras.</p>

<p>Well, if you want to go film, and your budget can afford it, go with a M6 or M7 with a 50/2 Summicron (which in comparison to most Leica lenses is reasonably priced). If it can't go with a M2 and a 50's 50/2. Really anything different will spark creativity, but the M's are not only different, they're great cameras so you'll keep your quality up (unlike using something like a Holga). </p>

<p>You're not insane. If I were you I'd get an M3 or an M2. But you need to be careful. You want a good one. Best to ask someone you can trust for guidance here. Personally I'd suggest a double stroke M3 with a summicron, preferably not the collapsible one.</p>

<p>Difficult to know whether you are insane or not. I know I am. With my Leica M2, it was love at first sight. It doesn't look snuggly, but it is.</p>

<p>I too shot professionally with Nikons for years. I also have Leica's, an M3 and M5 with Leitz lenses. I would not consider moving to Leica an "upgrade" but rather just different.</p>

<p>I've been using SLR cameras for 25 years or so (yikes!), but for most pictures I take now, I use a rangefinder. I carry either a Leica M4, or a Yashica CCN. I shoot both color and black and white, and both cameras perform very well.<br>

For simplicity of use, the Yashica is superior to the M4, as it is an aperture priority automatic. What I like most about the Yashica is it's relatively fast 35/1.8 lens. It's a good all-around lens, but it really shines in low light. Another benefit is it's light weight and nearly silent shutter (half as loud as a Leica).<br>

The M4 is the one I prefer for bright colors (cherry blossom season is around the corner here in Japan), and the DR Summicron I usually have attached to the M4 is a wonderful lens for such things. My favorite black and white lens is an old Summitar. It gives a wonderful "glow", and is probably among the least expensive of the Leica lenses. You'll need an adapter to use it on an M camera.<br>

I'll buy a Leica in any condition (rough looking or inoperable cameras are sometimes very cheap), and then send it off to get a CLA/repair. I figure any old camera which I am not familiar with could probably benefit from being serviced. I care less about the outward appearance of a camera than I do about how it works.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The big downside is that with the Leica you can later get a digital body for all the expensive lenses. with the Contax you're with film forever.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not so, Ted. You can now get an adapter to fit your fantastic Contax/Zeiss lenses to m4/3s cameras. From what I see they work great on these new, little cameras.</p>

<p>Hi everyone, quick question for all the Leica RF aficionados out there. I'm in the market for a mint condition .72VF M6TTL and I've recently spotted one online advertised at a brick and mortar store for $1799. This seems a bit high to me. What are the thoughts of the crowd? <br /> <br /> Also, are there any specific questions I should be asking both individuals and dealers about any perspective cameras? Should I be concerned with the number of rolls of film shot thought it and the number of shutter actuations? Whatever advice the community has is most sincerely appreciated. I'm looking so forward to acquiring my camera and I'm sure your thoughts will prove invaluable. <br /> <br /> Thanks much. I'm always at cmgreenberg@hotmail.com. Speak soon.<br>

Chris</p>

<p>I used a Canonet QL when it was brand new, its images were no match to that of a Leica. My friend had a Minolta fixed lens camera at the same time, and its images were far better, although still no match to that of a Leica.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm in the market for a mint condition .72VF M6TTL and I've recently spotted one online advertised at a brick and mortar store for $1799. This seems a bit high to me. What are the thoughts of the crowd?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You can check for yourself by doing a Completed Auctions search at eBay to see what they're going for on the auction site these days. The price you cite seems a bit high, but local stores naturally charge a little more than eBay and give you the advantage of being able to check in person whether it is "mint."</p>

<p>re Contax: Jim, I don't think they focus to infinity with the adapter for 4/3.</p>