leica purchase...?

[fp1]

Hi. I am thinking about buying an M6 with a 50mm f/2 summicron lens. I have a

few questions, if you don't mind.

 

Let me begin by saying that I actually began photographing seriously with a DSLR. I

subsequently decided that I preferred the look of medium format film (scanned) to

images made via straight digital capture. For a while, I failed to take 35mm

photography seriously, until I acquired a Hasselblad Xpan. The pano frames have

more film; it was understandable that the image quality was impressive. I still did

not take standard 35mm seriously, thinking that dslr's made the format obsolete.

After scanning some slides and b/w negatives, I found that, even in this

comparatively tiny format, I STILL prefer the look of scanned film to straight digital

capture.

 

I am a particularly wierd bird; my Nikon D70 is gathering dust, whilst I seem to

almost never to leave home without my xpan or my FE2. From what I have heard,

things tend to be the other way around for most folks.

 

To the point then, the one thing that I would change about my favorite

photographic tool, the Xpan, is the lack of a lens option for low light photography.

It would be nice to have a lens faster than f4 for shooting in dim light. I am trying

to choose among three camera/lens combinations: the Konica Hexar with 50mm f/

1.2 lens(about $2,500); the Hexar "point and shoot" with fixed 35mm f/2 lens ($

about $500); and the m6 with f/2 chrome summicron (both (barely) used, total of

$1800.

 

Questions:

What is so "superb" about leica lenses? I am not being facetious here; I prefer using

an RB67 to a Hasselblad 6x6. The "mystique" of the equipment is lost on me. Is

the quality issue of Leica more hyperbole than substance? I simply do not know,

for I am in the midwest, where Leica users don't seem to abound.

 

I am thinking the rangefinder option, even with a an f/2 lens, will allow for slower

shutter speeds than the slr with 1.8 lens.

 

How does the summicron f/2 perform wide open? it the price quoted above a good

price? (the equipment is hardly discernable from new.)

 

Thanks for reading all of this. Constructive comments appreciated.

[al_kaplan1]

It actually gets more complicated than that. The name Summicron has been in use since the 1950's to describe an f/2 lens. Several distinct generations of 35mm, 50mm and 90mm Summicrons have been made over that half century, along with periodic minor tweaking of such things as coatings. Assuming a late model Summicron the price is in the ballpark.

 

The original 7 element Summicron had very soft coatings and it is rare to find one without "cleaning marks" on the front element but it had extremely high resolution with somewhat low contrast by today's standards. Starting in the late 1960's with the 6 element version you get harder coatings, better contrast, and perhaps a bit less resolution at smaller apertures, which you're unlikely to notice unless you shoot slow fine grained films and make really large prints. The current lenses are extremely sharp. With typical 400 speed films the lens will out resolve the film.

 

The build quality of Leica M bodies and lenses is legendary. They are extremely reliable. Many of us have outfits comprised mostly of 30 to 40 (or more) year old Leica equipment which is still in regular use.

[working camera]

Modern Leica lenses in general have a reputation for performing superbly wide open.

The 50 Summicron, in particular, is considered by many as the yardstick by which all

other lenses are judged.

 

?Is the quality issue of Leica more hyperbole than substance??

 

Loaded question here. After this thread gets loaded with millions of yes and no

answers you just have to see for yourself and make up your own mind.

 

Good luck, Craig

[stephen_persky]

Harrel,

 

I am still very new to Leica. I have found that the majority of my pictures are a lot better than my old photographs with Nikon gear. I really like the "Leica Look". I also enjoy Digital so I bought a R9 SLR with a few Vario Lenses planning to get the Digital Module. Once I went with Leica it was all over for me. I tried to go back to a nice pro DLSR setup, but when I saw those pictures I had gotten with my Leica lenses I had to stay with Leica.

 

I did not like the fact that I could not get long telephoto lens capability with my rangefinder. I went with the SLR instead.

 

Regards

 

Steve Persky

[Karim Ghantous]

F Harrell wrote: "even in this comparatively tiny format, I STILL prefer the look of scanned film to straight digital capture."

 

I admit to being a little surprised that anyone can tell the difference!

 

You will find the quiet shutter of the Leica M bodies one of the nicest features of the system.

 

With a digital SLR your shots are effectively 'free' and the thought of the cost of film for some people puts them off ever going back (or using both concurrently). However I would say that the advantages of the Leica system easily justify the extra cost of using film.

 

Quick rundown:

 

- Nice looking camera, not small but not big either

 

- Quality lenses

 

- Lenses are tiny compared to SLR equivalents

 

- Silent shutter

 

- Excellent low-light performance

 

- Wide variety of lenses by different manufacturers available

[dale_griffith]

I wouldn't go with the Hexar/50mm f1.2 combination for several reasons. It's discontinued so future repair capabilities will be limited and the camera is unlikely to retain resale value the way Leicas do. There is wide disagreement about lens compability with Leica lenses. I've heard arguments from both sides, but why take a chance? I also think the Hexar RF is overpriced, but that's always a very subjective opinion. The non-interchangeable lens Hexar is likely a very good camera if you will be happy with that.

 

The Leica rangefinder system is the best way to go. As for lens quality, I've shot with Canon, Nikon and Minolta SLR's and subjectively think my Leica lenses beat anything I've shot in 35mm. Don't expect them to beat a good medium format system. The larger frame size of medium format will win that contest.

 

You may want to consider an M6TTL instead of an M6. They are newer and may be less likely to need an immediate CLA. Also, Leica changed the direction of rotation of the shutter speed dial with the M6TTL (and also made it larger and easier to rotate with the camera held up to your face). While this rotation change was inconvenient to those accustomed to shooting with older Leicas, the new direction is more intuitive to use with the LED arrows in the metering system.

 

As for the price, as Al has written it depends which 50mm Summicron version is involved and also whether the camer is an M6 or M6TTL. (Both have M6 written on the front. If the hot shoe has the extra contacts for a dedicated flash and "TTL" stamped on the flash mounting rail it's an M6TTL. The M6TTL will also have a larger shutter speed dial and the speeds will increase as you turn the dial CCW. The M6TTL is also 1.5mm taller but you certainly won't be able to tell this without having an M6 to compare it with.) $1800 is a decent price for an M6TTL with current version 50mm Summicron in excellent to neat mint condition, but maybe a little high if you have some other combination.

 

I'd rate the Leica M series as the best system for 35mm photography EXCEPT for sports and wildlife (which require lenses longer than 135mm) and macro photography. You'll still need an SLR for these.

[fp1]

Thanks for the replies.

 

Dale:

No, it is not a ttl model. Thank you for your detailed, informative reply. I am now

resigned to search for a better price. I am asssuming the ttl is only important for

flash photography, which I am not interested in. In any event, I do not wish to pay a

premium price for a less than premium model. Your pointing this issue out was

helpful. Thank you.

[christian_wagner]

If you enjoy the beauty of well-crafted equipment, I would recommend the M3 (1 Million+ serial number). It feels smoother than the newer cameras and is more beautiful to look at.

 

As to performance, Leica lenses shoot very well wide open. And that's the catch. To really appreciate the value and price of your equipment, you must use it in situations where you can only take the photo with the Leica and nothing else. A snap of the family from 10 feet away with aperture 8, 1/125s is not where your M with Summicron while outshine any competitors. And yet, in order to take extreme shots, you will also need to work on your technique, so that you can produce pictures as good as the camera and lens can give you.

 

I used to have an M3 with the Noctilux lens (50mm/1.0) which I loaded with Fuji 800 film and then shot in extremely low light conditions. Or, I loaded it with Kodak 25 ASA (not anymore) or Konica 50 ASA film for lowest grain, minimal depth of field daylight use. Great, but expensive.

 

If I bought similar equipment today, I would likely buy Voigtlander. The lenses are good and comparably inexpensive (I have the 15mm and 25mm). The look of the equipment is good, the feel is ok (Leica feels better). If you buy an M3 or M2 (I had both), get a well maintained and functioning model. Mine gave me several years of trouble free shooting.

 

Of course, all these comments are subjective and just based on my own experiences.

[majid]

I can relate, I went from a Canon 10D to a Leica M6TTL with a 50mm Summicron and later a Hasselblad.

<p>

If you want the ultimate in low-light performance, you can get a Leica M with a 50mm f/1.0 Noctilux. Apart from the wide aperture, the Noctilux also has a distinctive optical "fingerprint" when shot close to wide open, and good resistance to flare. A mint Noctilux can be had used for about $2000-2100 or so (one was listed on this site yesterday). All M bodies are compatible, but you will probably want one with a built-in meter, which narrows it down to the M5, M6, M7 and MP.

<p>

The 50mm Summicron is an excellent lens, very sharp in all its versions, but somewhat sensitive to flare. The optics are superlative in both sharpness and bokeh (the rendition of out-of-focus areas like backgrounds). I used to have a Nikon system, but I stopped using it altogether after getting the Leica.

<p>

The proof is in the pudding, here is <a href="http://www.majid.info/galleries/neopan1600/bssn1_popup1-1.htm">an example</a> with the Summicron, taken in very poor theater lighting, f/2.0 at 1/30 using Fuji Neopan 1600. The limiting factor is the quality of my scanner, a mere Nikon Coolscan IVED.

<p>

In between the Noctilux and the Summicron, you have the Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4, which is a 40-year old design soon to be replaced by the new (and incredibly expensive) Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH. The Summilux is not as sharp as the Summicron, but still remarkable, and it will certainly fall in price on the used market as gear fetichists upgrade. The Summicron is sometimes a bit tight in low-light conditions (I don't go below 1/15), the extra stop would make the difference. Another option to consider is the Voigtlander-Cosina Nokton 50mm f/1.5, which has about the same optical quality as the current Summilux for a much lower price.

<p>

Some people like wider lenses than 50mm. 35mm lenses give you another stop of handholdability due to their shorter focal length, so a 35mm f/1.4 can do the same job as a 50mm f/1.0, with wider depth of field. The Leica 35mm Summilux and Summicron are legendary (and the 35mm Summilux is equal in quality to the 35 Summicron). The new VC 35mm f/1.2 is also an option.

<p>

The M5 has a quirky lightmeter and compatibility issues with some lenses that protrude so much inside the body the block the swing arm of the meter. The MP is a premium model, too recent for you to get a decent used price. The M7 is very recent as well. The only differences between the M6 "Classic" and M6TTL is the TTL flash function with the Leica SF20 (I have never used this on mine), and the shutter speed dial rotates in different directions.

<p>

Konica makes excellent cameras and lenses, very close to Leica in quality, for a significantly lower price. That said, the $2500 price you are quoting is the new price at B&H. You should be able to get a used M6 with a Summilux for that price, let alone a Summicron. The Leica will hold its value longer, and will remain serviceable longer, unlike the electronics-bound Hexar.

[brambor]

Leica shines in being very compact yet matches or exceeds the other 35mm brands in lens performance for image quality. The controls are intuitive and pleasant to work with. It is a fun system for big bucks ;-)

[grant_.]

youve come to the wrong place for objective answers. most people on this forum have multiple orgasms when they touch their leica, so i wouldnt go by what most say here. i assure you, you wont be able to tell the difference in a print between a nikon, a canon, or a leica. i suggest trying one out, renting it. if you like it and you feel good with it, by all means get one. but dont be fooled into thinking you are getting something magical and mysterious because its a leica.

[al_kaplan1]

Grant, we both know that having multiple orgasms destroys the spiritual experience of owning and fondling a Leica.

[grant_.]

spirits got nuttin to do wit'it

[Brad_]

Is that why everyone here is into so many CLAs?

[grant_.]

heh, loin cloth edition

[brambor]

I thought only my wife could have those before she met me...

[Rob F.]

Well, I must be a "weird bird" myself, then. I seldom leave home without an M2, M6, or XPAN. One of my FE2's would be another choice, occasionally. After all that's been written, you still won't know if a Leica is for you until you try one.

[stephen_w.]

You don't mention the price; you should have. If it is around $1500 go for it. You will get all your money back if it's not for you.

[fp1]

Grant:

Thanks. That's what I was worried about.

 

Last respondent thusfar:

I did mention the price: $1,800 for the body and lens.

[anthony_brookes5]

Most of the answers here have been accurate and truthful. Grant's comments are are not very helpful but have an element of truth in them. Most Leica owners , once they have used a Leica, never want to use anything else though most have tried other cameras. You just can't say that about Nikon or Canon. I have used all three and although it is quite difficult to tell the diffence on many images it is like driving a Porsche and a Nissan. They both do the job, but hell if you can afford the Porsche.

[bob_jarman]

Coming from digital myself, I would agree with most of Anthony's comments, the Leica is a joy to use. I have more fun with my Leica than with any camera I have ever owned.

 

That said, I would not go so far as to say "you will never want to use anything else". :) I may agree that for candid and for street shooting I may never want another camera, but a DSLR or SLR is made for fast action and wildlife shooting which the Leica is not.

 

I am sure that Anthony meant to restrict his answer to say for the type of shooting that Leica's are designed to do. :) And for those purposes, I would agree with him

[stephen_w.]

F.,

 

Sorry, i missed it. It's a bit too high, but if you cannot wait, go for it.

[fp1]

Is it really high? What should I expect to pay?

Thanks in advance.