Advise for a Nikon user

[manel_soria]

Hi,

 

I think that sooner or later everybody involved in photos, even for

hobby, will arrive to Leica. I have seen them and I like them.

 

I'm familiar with many of the old Nikon models, F, F3, FM, FM2 and

newer models. I'm used (I'm trying to get used) to shot without

photometer. I have been playing with Russian FED 2 cameras but I'm

disapointed, not because of the optics, but because the finder that is

terrible.

 

What Leica would you advise me to look for ? I want a functional

camera and lens (35mm, 50mm ?) , I don't want to spend a lot, I'm not

worried about cosmetics, I don't need photometer. What model would you

suggest me ? How much should I pay ? Is there a decent replica of a

Leica ?

 

Thanks

[steve_levine]

Buy a new Bessa RF camera, and find a used Summicron 50mm. You will then have the best of all worlds(easy to load body and Leica glass), at a ridiculous low price.

[dennis_couvillion]

Manel, if you like the 50mm lens as your primary lens, and a built in meter is not a priority, a single stroke M3 (with a serial number above 1,000,000) is a good bet for you. There is a wide selection of used 50mm lenses available to you such as the older f1.4 Summilux or even the latest model f2 Summicron. The M3 is a wonderfully built camera with a contrasty, easy to focus, life-size viewfinder. If you are able to find a good one, and have it checked out and serviced by a qualified repair person, the M3 could serve you well for many years. It is a fun camera to use. Good luck and don't hesitate to ask questions.

[working camera]

"I don't want to spend a lot"

 

Then you probably should not be looking at Leica. The optics is a prime reason for tolerating a camera body which is basically 1940s technology. The bodies are relatively cheap. The lenses are the expensive part of Leica. So you start with a 35 and 50, and then you might like to expand your kit to 90 and a 28. It all adds up in terms of $ etc.

 

A decent user M6 or M6TTL is a good place to start. As you are probably aware, earlier models have no TTL metering which can be a culture shock if you are not used to hand metering.

 

"Is there a decent replica of a Leica?" In my opinion no.

 

The Voigtlanders are, however, a cost effective option for RF photography.

[jtk]

You might consider the Leica CM or CM Zoom. The lens will rival the best Leica M lenses. Small, quiet, would be new...and would cost the same or less than a Voigtlander with a modern Leica lens. IMO the CM / CM zoom are consistent with fundamental Leica concept: small, quiet, meticulous quality.

[ben z]

"I think that sooner or later everybody involved in photos, even for hobby, will arrive to Leica."

 

Not if the guys at Leica who set the prices have any say in it : (

[oliver pera]

Manel,

<p>

just one thought concerning the difference between working with a rangefinder and an SLR: did you already use a rangefinder in taking pictures and liked it, or do you simply like the Leica feel when handling the body? I ask because the smooth handling of the body always fascinated me, but it took me some time till I got used to the rangefinder and its pros and cons - before I only had Nikon SLRs.

<p>

And if you like it, you should look for the right combination of focal lengths and viewfinder magnification. <a href="http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/choosem.html">This is a link to an article by Erwin Puts</a> which might be useful for you.

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<I>I think that sooner or later everybody involved in photos, even for hobby, will arrive to

Leica. I have seen them and I like them.</I><P>Maybe. Heh. Those of us who tell time

and wear a watch would love a Rolex, but you don't need a Rolex to tell time.<P>If you're

going to get a Leica, get a Leica. For your street stuff you could do no better, as

mentioned above, than a used M6. Get an older 35mm f2.0 Summicron (all Summicrons

are

f2.0, while all Summiluxes are f1.4). An M6 and a 35mm will give you a terrific intro into

Leicas. You'll still enjoy using your Nikons, but all of a sudden they'll feel a bit clunky.

[patricks]

i thought everyone sooner or later arrived to digital :-)

 

even with a 'beginners set' so are looking at $1,200 - $1,500. The whole point with shooting Leica is the quality of the optics, the handling and compactness of the camera as well as it available light capabilities. I'd say decide on a lens first, my ultimate recommendation would be a latest version 35/2 ASPH or a Summicron 50/2 (w/ the build-in hood). then go for a M6TTL, but now you are looking at $2,000+. I guess you can find a street-worthy M3/M2 for around $600 that may/may not be in dire straits for a CLA ($250) and an older 40mm lens for around $300-400, but what are you trying to achieve? what is your objective to getting a leica? what will a leica do that your other cameras cannot?

[peter_evans4]

<p>Patrick's advice is good. Since you don't know whether you want 35mm or 50mm (or both) it's silly to spend an enormous pile of money on any example of either. If you want something smallish, cheap, very quiet and very good (though absolutely dependent on batteries), try a <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/hexar.html">Hexar</a>. Anyway, brand-worshipping and talk of "mystique" are for ninnies: think with your <em>head</em>.</p><p>We read: <em>Those of us who tell time and wear a watch would love a Rolex,</em></p><p>I tell time and wear a watch. I'd hate a Rolex: big, heavy, ugly, ostentatious things. I prefer my Casio, but then perhaps my mileage varies.</p>

[summitar]

Try a Konica Auto S2. Around $40 to $80. Clunky compared with a Leica, but much better range finder/view finder. Built in CdS meter with option for full manual or shutter preferred automation. You'll get 90-98 percent of the photo quality of a Leica (lens is fixed 45 mm f1.8) at a fraction fo the cost. It will help you decide if you want to staty with rangefinders. I don't see how you can get into total Leica for less than $500-600 which should get you a LTM IIIc and a Summitar lens. Plan on another $100-200 if it needs a CLA.

[frank_farmer2]

One cheap ("cheap," of course, is relative) way to get into Leica is to find a good user M4-P. They tend to sell at a lower cost than a M3 or M4 or M2. It has framelines for both 35 and 50.

 

I love my M3, but it is no good for 35mm lenses because it doesn't have framelines that wide. Every M camera after it does. A M2 is also a good choice but it will be more expensive than a M4-P.

 

One thing to consider too, is that if you buy a camera that is 20 or 30 years old, it will need a CLA. I just got my M3 back from DAG, who did a fine job, at a cost of $323.00 (including an eyepiece guard and return shipping).

 

Good luck with your choice.

 

Frank

[richard_meyers]

"Ben Z Photo.net Patron, jul 12, 2005; 08:44 a.m.

"I think that sooner or later everybody involved in photos, even for hobby, will arrive to Leica."

 

Not if the guys at Leica who set the prices have any say in it : ("

 

Very good! LOL :-)

 

Manel -

 

I see you have mostly manual Nikons. A point to consider is that Nikkors and Leicas focus in the opposite direction. When I bought my first Leica M/Summicron, this caused me to miss a few shots as I switched back and forth. Now I use Nikon AF so it's not a problem.

[Troll]

Unless there is some specific reason that you NEED a Leica, I suggest that you stick with Nikon.

[gabrielma]

<i><B>Q: </B>I think that sooner or later everybody involved in photos, even for hobby, will arrive to Leica. I have seen them and </i>I like them<i>.<BR>

<B>A: </B>I suggest that you stick with Nikon<BR><BR>

<B>Q: </B>What Leica would you advise me to look for ?<BR>

<B>A: </B>Buy a new Bessa RF camera<BR><BR></i>

Manel, it's hard getting advise, isn't it? If you like Leica, and you don't want to spend a lot, then I would advise you start with the "cheapest" there is: used LTM (aka screwmount) lenses and a Leica IIIa; if you get a Summar 50mm lens in good condition with a IIIa or IIIc in good condition, if you shop around well, it may cost you about $350-500 (yes, that's cheap for Leica). The only alternative to go cheaper is to get a Bessa body if you want to stick with the Leica glass. There are some good "bargains" for Leica 50mm Summicrons at about $300-400; my favorite is the Summitar, it's a bit soft wide open, but the center is rather sharp in focus.<BR><BR>

Good luck with your search. OT, I would also read here: <a href="http://www.nemeng.com/leica/index.shtml">Leica FAQ</a>.

[frank granovski]

Frank, Sherry has an M4-P for sale right now. It's only $2700+ USD.

[gabrielma]

Ludwig: gracias por el consejo. No sabia que existia tal sitio; le echare un vistazo. Espero que la "enajenez" que aqui de a menudeo existe no se de o sea rara ahi.

[steve_chan5]

I haven't looked through the viewfinder of the old LTM Leica bodies, but I suspect that you will find their finders to be relatively squinty and dim. If you still want to stay cheap, and don't mind your camera gear having the feel of agricultural equipment, the Zorki 4 and Zorki 6 are dirt cheap and have better finders.

Your Fed-2's viewfinder can be improved by removing the diopter adjustment lens, but I don't know if you're that handy.

 

If you are patient, you can find beater M2/M3 bodies with a Summicron for around $700 total on EBay. But you need to be patient, relentless and quick to click "Buy it now!" Otherwise, you'll need to buy something less expensive - you've had a bunch of good recommendations so far.

[marinus]

Ludwig A:

 

Por favor, ?d�nde encuentro este foro que comentaste a Man鬿

 

Saludos

[tom_bryant]

A leica M3, bought now for $750 + 200 for a good CLA will put you back $950 USD. A Bessa will put you back around $400 - 600.

 

In 10 years, when you decide to sell it, the Bessa will be worth around

$100. The Leica will be worth about $800.

 

Q: Which costs more?

 

Bessas are also prone to jamming at inopportune times. My friend Dr B bought one for a trip to Europe, and it jammed on his second day out.

When he got back he bought an M3.

[jason]

I use both systems..actually I also use Pentax and now Canon-ae-1Program.The difference between Nikon and Leica is considerable.

The cost factor so wide as to almost require a Stargate-SG-1 to make

a comparison. I purchased a user 35mmf2.0 Nikkor-lens-MF recently for Canadian $20.00. I bought from a friend a much older 35mmf2.8Summaron with Goggles(imperfect) for more than 10x more and it was a bargain.

A Leica M3 or whatever is not much smaller than a Nikon-F body. It is quieter but not silent.The lenses focus in opposite directions.This can be a major source of hassle, till you are totally familiar. Lens mounting is a cause of concern! I have learned to hold the Nikons almost the wrong way round so as not to foul the mount. I NEVER use Nikons with my Leicas. If I really need a Leica-M and an SLR its the CanonAe-1P. It feels like a very smooth Leica.I know, I know! Its Leicas we should be pushing! Not Bessa, Canons, Hexars(always this one sounds like a Witch thing!)or minoltas..

A Leica M will take time for true familiarity. They are cranky, obstinate, difficult cameras to work with. They are SLOW. They are as precise a surgeon's scapel cut, with the accuaracy in focusing 50mm lenses, like a guided laser. The lenses are better than anybodys by at least two stops! If your Nikkor was great at f4, the Leica is better at f2.0!!You can travel with one or two lenses(thats what most can afford) and be very happy with simplicity.

If weather conditions,reckless party people with open bottles of beer etc are daunting, you still have your Nikons! The Leicas stay at home!

Is it worth the trouble?

You only live once. Do it in style!

But keep your Nikons.

[EricM]

"In 10 years, when you decide to sell it, the Bessa will be worth around $100. The Leica will be worth about $800."

 

do you really think you can take your shots down to the drugstore and get prints in ten years? c'mon...the second film is even harder to get, the prices of used Leica gear will plumet and follow suit like all the slr manufactures that now offer digital. it will be like yanking gasoline from the masses. "nice beemer, too bad you can't drive it..."

[peter]

I agree with the view expressed above that you should get a Leica not a copy - IF YOU CAN AFFORD IT. There is no doubt that the damn things are often too expensive (impact of collectors etc.) but believe me if you are hankering for one do not accept second best or (if you are like me ) no matter how happy you are in the beginning you will probably soon begin to regret it. It is hard to advise you what to get however. Probably a "user" M3 and a 50mm summicron of similar or later vintage or better yet a 35mm summicron as it has wider application. I have a good but not collector quality M4-P and a set of 35mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses I built up over the years and they are great, But you will pay more for a kit like this - but you can do what I did - build the kit slowly and go for quality.

[thmt__]

M3 with a handheld meter. Perfect for the 50mm. Pair it with a summicron or summicron

DR.

[frank_farmer2]

Another thing to remember about the Nikon v. Leica difference is that the aperture rings are numbered in the opposite direction.

 

Re: Frank's comment about Sherry Krauter's Leica M4-P at $2750, that is a "like new" example of a silver chrome M4-P. A much smaller number of silver chrome Leica M4-P's were made compared to the much more common black chrome M4-P bodies. Its relative rarity and its outstanding condition (complete with box and manual) inflate its price. Also, compare Sherry's prices on older bodies, in general, to those elsewhere, and you'll find them to be a bit higher. That, I presume, is because most items include a CLA. I don't know that though. Her cameras also seem to be in exceptionally clean and well-cared-for condition. I bought a 50 'cron from her not too long ago and am tickled pink with it.