Why do you love Leica?

Ahem.

 

As somebody who's been lurking (with a *very* occasional post in a W/NW thread) for a

few months now, please permit me to jump in here--and interrupt the current brou-ha-

ha--with a question I've been meaning to ask for some time:

 

Why do you love Leica?

 

I don't own a Leica, and I ceratinly can't afford to buy one any time soon, so you can think

of this as somebody on the outside looking in.

 

I've seen enough great pictures taken with a Leica to know that it is a most capable tool.

I've read descriptions of the simplicity of its ``user interface'' that makes it seem both

simple and elegant. But, I've never actually had my hands on one--thus the curiousity.

 

Please, don't respond unless you actually (have) own(ed) a Leica and actually love (or, at

least, really like) it. I'm not interested in how the company is going to $#3! in a

handbasket, or how digital is superior, or how it's only for too-rich fondlers, or whatever.

Just give me the good, not the bad nor ugly.

 

Thanks,

 

b&

Ben,

 

I like small, quiet, precision mechanical devices, I really enjoy the optics (especially in low light and in situations where flare would be bad), and, of course, chicks dig 'em.

 

:D

Simple, well made, feels good in my hands, lotsa glass and metal - to me weight = quality (remember when you where a kid at your birthday party, those heavy presents were cool toys, the light ones were socks!), can use a bazillion different lenses on it, history/heritage, conversation piece. <p> And I�ll admin what others wont --> snob appeal/exclusive. I don�t have a mistress, or a (reliable) sports car, so this is my one indulgence.

For me it's the no-nonsense user interface, the tactile feedback, the viewfinder of the Leicaflex SL, and the first-rate optics.

I'm not as deeply into Leica as some folks here, just enough to be hooked. I like well-made things that work well. BTW, you can get into Leica for a lot less that you might suppose. Look at the Leicaflex SL and the 2-cam 50,35, 90 and 135 lenses that were sold in the 70's with them. The SL costs no more than a comparable Canon F-1.

Because it reminds me of my grandfather, and of an era when thing were expected to last at least 40-50 years-plus.

 

For me it�s more about the function, performance & industrial design, than of cost & fashion�

 

Small, Perfect, Smooth, Heavy, Well Built, Often with Great Results�A True Classic!

Simplicity.

quietness and sharp optics.

For the same reasons I wear a Rolex.

 

They are both totally mechanical (at least my old M2 and 111f are) but

very accurate and a joy to use.

 

The lenses are pin sharp and it is unobtrusive.

 

I do also use electronic AF cameras but somehow the little M2 brings a

smile to my face whanever I use it and the picture quality is at least as

good as my canons.

 

It's simple really there just nice to use.

I use Leicaflex, not M cameras, and have owned this equipment since 1971. I love the exquisite, simple mechanics, and superb optics. I have used other equipment and it simply does not come close.

 

You do not own any? My goodness, man, what are you waiting for?

It's simple: <i>Compact, well-made, killer optics. </i> Other

cameras might be more compact, made as well and (in rare

cases) have equally good optics, but no other camera I'm aware

of puts it all into one package the way the M does.

Like Sheldon says, without a mistress Leica is my "little, red sports car". That's how my wife understands it.

 

However, I like it because it's a relatively simple, reliable and usable system, that feels strong, secure and good in your hands. I'm not holding a piece of serial-made machinery, but a precision instrument.

 

Besides, the camera is very discreet, its lenses are superb, and the results are pleasing to me.

Well, I guess it could loosely be called a �love affair� but that implies infatuation with no real foundation. I prefer to call it �dedication� to a system that was not only unique to start, but has continued to grow in usefulness over the major part of a century. Couple that with the fact that the Leitz family were not only visionaries, but totally dedicated to excellence in addition to sound business practices. That they outlasted the rest of the German camera industry can only be attributed to that combination. The only other camera I can think of as deserving that kind of dedication is the Rolleiflex TLR.

I think a mistress is much more fun than a camera, guys. Costs less, too.

"I think a mistress is much more fun than a camera, guys. Costs less, too."

 

I agree with the fun part, but the cost part I can't. Do you happen to know anybody who has gotten divorced because of a mistress, costs them an arm and a leg, and their house, car, dog, dishes, clothes, kids, tv, ect... ;-)

I don't understand people who "love" gear. It's useful, it's high quality, its interface works

well -- fine. But love seems more suited to those who enjoy fondle-friendly jewelry.

A mistress is a much more expensive proposition than a Leica. Both have their good points.

Douglas - I agree with the first part of your comment, but not the second - particularly if one happens to marry them. ;-)

 

Ben - I don't "love" my Leica Ms, but, like others have commented, I certainly appreciate the size, precision and optical qualities they provide. I'm too old to benefit from the "chick-magnet" aspect of the cameras, so I have to settle for the fact that they contribute to good photographs.

You guys either use cheap Leicas or you have very expensive mistresses. Still, I'd rather fondle the latter than the former.

"I don't understand people who "love" gear."

<p>

And I don't understand people who 'love' the dictionary to the

exclusion of common sense, but there you go. Besides, <i>Love

Leica</i> is a dandy alliteration.

Does what I want it to, the imaging quality, design and build quality, fast lenses.

I hope having owned a Minilux qualifies me to answer.

 

Sheldon, I think I'm going to start wrapping up bricks for my son's birthday. What you say about socks is so true, and getting a few bricks might prevent expensive tastes forming. (No I mean real bricks, not Miniluxes.)

 

Ben you may as well just buy your Leica. I know I've wasted more money on camera gear that didn't make me happy than if I'd just bought the Leica to start with. I love my Canon EOS gear but it does a different thing - I'm talking about Olympus XA, manual Nikons, Yashica rangefinders etc.

Ben Goren, you already seem to know why most of us "love" our Leicas, but you say you've never handled (fondled?) one. The answer to your quest can be found at the nearest Leica shop. Go there, don a pair of clean white cotton gloves and ask the nice salesman to permit you to (gently) handle a Leica of your choice. My guess is that you'll want to take it home to bed with you! At least that was my reaction to my new MP. There are ways to get around the cost, you can always sell all your furniture and/or automobile! You'll find a way. Best wishes, Bill

I love my wife and kids...I really like my Leica. to those who've stated that it's harmless to state you 'love' your gear I disagree. Ask your wife, or your children if they feel your camera (or watch or whatever) is on the same plane they consider themselves to be in your life. It really does kind of dilute the term when you turn around and tell your spouse 'you love them'. My father is dying of cancer right now...I sure wouldn't want him to feel my camera was on equal footing with him as far as my feelings go. My two cents anyway.

Everything you need is right under your fingers and does exactly what you want- no menus, LCD's or other confusion. The main advantage, then, over a manual SLR is the rangefinder focusing system. To me it is a relief to use compared to an SLR. Its size, mechanical quality and classic styling are great, and of course the lenses are high quality. Beyond that, my reason is "just because". For the highest quality gear of its kind I don't think the system is that expensive,especially used- what'd I pay for that 4 year old computer sitting in the basement...?