What I've learnt so far...

OK guys this is what the newbie has learnt so far. Correct me if I'm wrong

 

<p>

 

1. Leica lenses: no one would dare complaint about them cos they are excellent.

 

<p>

 

2. But leica bodies, as aesthetically pleasing as they are, are primitive by most standards (including M7). The greatest advantage is that it uses the leica lenses, has the widest base distance (compared to other M-mounts) for most accurate focusing and that (at least 0.72 and 0.85) it can accurately focus telephoto lenses through the viewfinder (cos they are bright and are of higher magnification).

 

<p>

 

3. Cheaper bodies available may not be entirely compatible (R2 and Hexar RF) with the leica lenses.

 

<p>

 

4. which really should be No 1, all this stuff ain't worth anything if you don't compose good photos.

 

<p>

 

Nick

So what's your point?

You got it.

 

<p>

 

Steve

Nick,

 

<p>

 

The Leica lenses are nice, VERY nice. Some are just about the best

there is. But there are alternatives for everything except the

Noctilux. Most of us won't miss the Leica qualities and advantages,

as we've never had direct comparisons. Some of the differences

aren't just resolution or contrast, but the mysterious bokeh, which

is a real phenomenon.

 

<p>

 

I'm not sure "primitive" is the right term, but the M7 is way behind

in many features. OTOH, it is a very good picture-taking machine.

 

<p>

 

Leica's have an unequaled, mechanical feel that none of the other

cameras can duplicate. It's not necessarily all-together better or

worth the extra money, but it is there. An R2 or Hexar RF is not an

M camera, but very viable alternatives.

 

<p>

 

Buy what cameras and lenses you can afford or feel comfortable with,

and use them. Please don't put them on the shelf. They are not art

or shelf pieces. They were designed to take pictures.

 

<p>

 

I also echo the other post though. What's your point? Do you want a

recommendation? Seek out someone nearby who owns what you are

considering and ask them for a loan or at least a try-out. Or rent a

Leica M6 and 35/2 for a weekend and see for yourself.

 

<p>

 

Skip

Do not know of any 35mm Rangefinder body that was ever made that

is "better" than a Leica M-especially the older cameras. My M3 is 50

years old and still works like new. When I had it cleaned, it hadn't

been service for over 45 years and the finder was still in perfect

allignment.

 

<p>

 

I'd add that leica cameras are great for hand held, low light,

images, and also where camera noise can be a nuisance. The

combination of lenses that are sharp wide open, and a nearly

vibration free shutter allows for relatively sharp images at speeds

that most cameras would produce a blurred mess.

The M7 primitive??!! It may not have all the gee-whiz electonics of

some of the newer cameras but this does not make it primitive.

Really what would you rather take for a spin, a brand new Toyota

Camry with electonic everything, or a nice mechanical 308 Ferrari

('primitive' by todays standards I guess).

Skip:

 

<p>

 

<b> But there are alternatives for everything except the

Noctilux.</b> I think you need to talk to Canon.

 

<p>

 

Bob: the Toyota Camry is a very nice and reliable car; still it

handles like a 1956 Buick Roadmaster. That is why I avoid

Toyota sedans. <b> ;<)</b>

 

<p>

 

Art

Anyone who does not know the benefits offered by a M camera over

other modern cameras will always call them primative. But as other

manufacturers became obssessed with automation, gadgets and trying to

outdo the competition, they started to loose what 35mm photography

was really about, small compact cameras. The Leica M has maintained

this tradition and therefore has a niche market.

The M bodies are known for having the best viewfinder in 35mm

photography. The brightness of the viewfinder, lack of mirror slap,

and lenses that perform well at wide apertures make the M system

reknown for hand-held low light photography. The quietness of the

shutter makes the M cameras about the best available choice for

unobtrusive photography.

 

<p>

 

Being able to use M lenses is a factor, but not really so important

really, especially if you shoot hand-held like most Leica M

photographers.

 

<p>

 

As far as being "primitive", have someone show you or describe the

viewfinder/rangefinder assembly sometime, it's one of the most complex

mechanical achievements ever.

 

<p>

 

Joe

I like Leica M camera's <b>because</b> they're primitive by most standards. To me a camera is a tool, not a toy.

The Leica M is an instrument....not a computer!

I know whatcha mean by simplicity. It does everything I want it to

do. Compact, I think it's form following function, I mean this

thing's just deep enough to accomodate a roll of film! Cool! The

rangefinder design is so simple- no mirror shake at slow speeds.

Awesome lenses, what a timeless product. One thing I think would be

sweet would be 1/2000-1/4000 of a second shutter speed (but given

that it's a cloth shutter, perhaps impossible for 1/4000).

Leica bodies primitive. The only purpose of the camera body is to

provide a light tight container for the film and this the Leica does

very well.

Hello Nick. The original little Leica's were designed to test

35mm film.All non metered Leica's will test the photographer.Any

metered Leica will just let you in the back door to enjoy the

benefits of Leica lenses and Leica photography.

Sad!for me its the most modern camera!its not primitive but pure.

i have Nikons,Canon,Pentax and Rollie TLR.Nothing feels or makes me

happier than my '67 M3!It works for me.Funny in Tina Ruisingers book,

"Faces of photography" most of the masters portrayed,used Leicas....

If i wanted BattleStar Gallactica,i'd have bought the EOS-1n or Nikon-

F5.i make the film companies happy,i do not intend supporting the

battery companies as well...

Nicholas; You should own a few Zorki's and a Leica M to see what they

both are great for....<b>More Zorki's were produced than Leicas! </b>

The beater 1955 M3 of mine is extremely quiet; and low light focusing

is alot more consistant than my Nikon F....Most of the SLR autofocus

lenses are way too slow for a Nocturnal person like me....Maybe I

will get a autofocus F1.4 or F1.0 lens set if I win the

lottery....Otherwise I will have to put up with my Zorki 3C and Canon

F1.2 or my Leica M3 and Noctilux...I love the full control of these

beasts with no damn flash or beeps to spook my latest subject...For

the soccer moms shooting their kids in well lite areas the available

at Walmart 24 hours a day Canon Rebel G or X with zoom is a <b>great

value</b>..Leica equipment is expensive; In a high risk area I prefer

to use my Zorki3c and Canon f1.2...Kelly

Just because it's an old design doesn't make outdated if it's still

desireable. The way I look at it, the M7 is way AHEAD of the Canon,

Nikon bodies in (at least) one major aspect, that it has eliminated

the mirror from the body.