One possibility: moving to Leica from Nikon

[AntonioC]

I guess this Leica virus has hit me. I have a nice set up which covers all my photographical needs (F100 24/2.8 50/1.4 70-210/4, SB22s, extension tubes).

My main interest in photography is street, some portraiture and night photography. I love my camera, it has much more than I'll ever need. But it's big, obtrusive, and quite noisy compared to a RF.

I usually don't carry all the equipment togheter because I like to go as light as possible down the streets, and being nearly unnoticeable.

All of these are rationalizations of a somehow primary instinct leading me to a M6. Why? I can't state it clearly, I sometimes feel the need to reduce my approach to photography to the basics, as in the early times of my FM2+50 (now sold).

It's not possible for me to use e-Bay to get the maximum from my stuff, since I should then send to the US or wherever and don't like the idea. My main chance here is to go to a retailer for an exchange, or sell privately (much more risk and fuss). Now, selling the above listed stuff, I can barely get the amount for a used M6, and then I should shell out the money for 1 (ONE!) used lens. Considering street photography I'd be more inclined to a Summicron 35, but I think a 50 could be borderline allowing also some kind of portraiture (well, kind of).

Some how it seems to me a crime to sell everything for just 1 body + 1 lens. Do the Leica mistique really exist?

 

<p>

 

I'd like to hear the experience of any of you who was in the same situation as me. BTW I mostly do BW.

 

<p>

 

Best regards.

[steven_teh1]

Hi Antonio,

 

<p>

 

I have switch to a M6TTL + 35 Summicron ASPH about 2 months ago. I

have given a F100 with MB15, 28-70 AFS, 105 Macro, 80-200 AFS, 20mm

f/2.8 and 300 f/4 EDIF for just the above one body plus 1 lens. To

be honest with you, I have not regretted one little bit at all after

I have seen the first roll of prints.

 

<p>

 

I really enjoyed being able to move around freely, without lugging

the above with a tripod. And I can attest that my hand-held shots

is as sharp if not sharper than that I have gotten from the tripod

mounted SLR gears.

 

<p>

 

Now, I always have my M6 with 35 mounted with me everyday and

everywhere. With this, I have gotten shots which I would never have

thought of had I still clung on to my SLR. However, this is not to

put down the SLR which definitely has its place in photography.

 

<p>

 

Well, I guess the final decision really boils down to your

photographic needs. If street photography is your priority, then you

will not go wrong with the M6. As for 35 or 50, it really is

individual preference. However, one thing I like about the 35 is the

wider depth of field, which on many occasions has allowed me to do

away with the focusing by setting to hyperfocal.

 

<p>

 

Good Luck!

 

<p>

 

Steven

[paul_chefurka]

You're looking at a big decision - one that could haver major

repercussions, especially if it's wrong. I fully understand the

desire to lighten the load, and I also understand the lure of the

Leica.

 

<p>

 

But - have you ever tried to use an RF seriously before? If not, you

should do that before you commit to a wholesale switch of systems, as

the experience is quite different from using an SLR.

 

<p>

 

I'd suggest not going for an M6 right off the bat. What I'd suggest

is to hang onto your Nikon gear, and buy a Bessa-R with a 35/1.7

Ultron or the Cosina 35/2.5. Use it for a while, and if you decide

that RF photography is what you want to do, decide what kind of gear

you want to get at that point.

 

<p>

 

The Cosina setup will cost less than $1000 US ($800 with the 35/2.5),

and gets you close enough to a Leica-style camera and results that

you will be able to make a confident decisions. This is not the case

IME for the other standard recommendation, which is a used '70s era

fixed-lens RF such as a Canonet or Olympus.

 

<p>

 

You may even find that the Bessa-R with the Ultron and the 50/1.5

Nokton will do exactly what you need, for a lot less outlay than a

Leica. Of course you don't get the M shutter, the M lensmount, the

name or the red dot. You *will* get a very competent interchangeable-

lens RF with very good lenses and a Leica-class viewfinder at a price

that might not force you to dump a very good SLR system.

[lucien1]

Please, read <a

href="http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=005R

pW"> Kirk Tuck's Leica M6 Review </a>.

 

<p>

 

He came from the F5 to the M6.

[david_cunningham2]

Antonio...

 

<p>

 

I went through the same dilemma that you're going through last year.

I sold off my Nikon equipment (F100, lenses...) and purchased an M6-

TTL (new) and a preASPH 35/2 and an older 50/2 (used) last year. I

had to dip into my savings a bit, but the decision was one of the

best I've ever made. I love the Leica! I carry it everywhere I go,

something I wouldn't think of doing with the Nikon. I'm thinking of

adding a Nikon FM3a to my bag (when it's released) and an old 35-

70/3.5 AIS zoom for those times I need an SLR, but I'm not totally

sold on the idea yet.

 

<p>

 

If you can only afford one lens, I'd recommend a used Summicron 50/2

(the one just before the current version, with the focussing tab).

 

<p>

 

Bottom line... Go for it.

[geri_brandimarte2]

Antonio,

I have basically the same nikon gear as you do and am intersted in

the same type of photography. I also agree that the F100 is a

fabulous camera and has everything I will need, but it is bigger and

heavier than I have come to like. A couple of months ago I bought a

used M6 and 35 summilux and 50 summicron. I have shot many rolls of

film and love the camera. So much so that I am going to trade in my

nikon equiptment for another M6 and also get a 90/2.8. If you have

not used a rangefinder before I would definetely use one before

making such a big decision--you will obviously lose value when

trading in your Nikon gear. Finally, as Paul states the Bessa R

might be an option for you--for the price of an M6 and one lense(new)

you could practically get the whole Bessa system. Not having tried a

rangefinder prior to my purchase I looked at the Bessa R and it

seemed like a great camera for the money. However, you may decide

that a rangefinder is the camera for you and you might wish you had

the Leica. I am glad I took a look at the Leica before I made my

purchase. Good luck on your decision. Geri

[andrew_schank]

I would have a hard time getting rid of my N90S and 3 or 4 of my

favorite SLR lenses. The ability to do macro, and to use a zoom and

fill flash for events would be too much of a limitation. To me, the

rangefinder is an addition to, and not a replacement of, a good SLR.

That's why the rangefinders of the 1950's gave way to SLR's.

 

<p>

 

I've been seeing the current Konica Hexar RF selling on Ebay with

lens for a little over $1000--you might want to take a look at that

camera, as it is a nice mix between your Nikon and the M6. It has

easy load and AE exposures, as well as a more useable 1/125 flash

sync for fill when needed. Unfortunately, any one camera is going to

have its limits, so only you will be able to decide which attributes

are most important for your style.

[albert_smith]

I concurrently use both the Leica M and Nikon SLRs, and while the

thought of minimizing seems good sometimes, I never felt the ability

to go 100% towards a rangefinder only system. I did do some

extensive deprivation exercises, (living abroad for a year with only

a Leica M6 and two lenses), but there are simply certain things that

a SLR can do that can't be replicated with a rangefinder.

 

<p>

 

To simplify, I only use manual Nikons and real prime AIS lenses...

f/8 is f/8 and 1/250th is 1/250th. I can switch back and forth

between systems without an major shift in philosphy or technique,

other than of course the viewfinder. I think that you should really

not rush to abandon a system unless it is based on some tangible

thing that you can truely state from experience... not because of a

theory yet unproven. If you keep your current camera locked on auto-

everything now, the M6 will be a shock at first. Even a guy with an

old Pentax K-1000 would have an easier transition to an M6 than an F5

or EOS-3, user that shoots on auto all of the time.

 

<p>

 

With that said, I will never be without Leica glass. It does have a

look that is unique. I don't know if you would call it "mystique",

but those slide really pop off of the light table. If a disaster

caused me to lose all of my photo gear today , a Leica M6 with 35mm

and 50mm Summicrons would be my first acquisitions. I could live for

quite sometime with this minimum gear, but a SLR would be in my

future when finances permit.

[jackflesher]

Antonio:

 

<p>

 

I too have had Nikon SLR gear for years, and always updated, most

recently to the F100 and F5 combo, with an assortment of lenses.

About 9 months ago, I decided to try out an M6. Very shortly

thereafter, I sold most of my Nikon lenses and added Leica glass. Now

two M6 bodies and and assortment of outstanding Leica lenses later, I

am considering the sale of my remaining Nikon SLR gear. Now I am

deciding between keeping the F5 with the 80-400 zoom for those times

when I want a long lens, or just getting a used D1 and doing those

images digitally. As others have stated, the RF is not for eveybody.

It takes a bit of getting used to, but for street photography, it

can't be beat.

 

<p>

 

One other point that nobody has mentioned: I find that people take me

less seriously when I shoot with the Leica, and hence are not

intimidated by the guy with the "toy camera" like they were with the

guy that looked like a "pro". I am definately getting a much higher

percentage of images that look like I was a casual observer to the

scene instead of that "undesired photographer was here" look. Heck,

even my kids pose more naturally in front of the M, and they've been

photographed for years with the big Nikon!

[paul_chefurka]

I should add that like many others I've kept my Nikon gear - an F3

and FE2 with a 24, 50, 55, 85 and 180. My rationale was the usual -

that there are some things an SLR does better than a rangefinder.

 

<p>

 

What I've found is that the things an SLR does better are things I

have no interest in - like macro and long tele. I even prefer my

M6/135 combo to the F3/180. so despite my best intentions, my Nikon

gear sits unused, gathering dust as the batteries leak :-)

 

<p>

 

I still think it would take a major leap of faith to dump one system

for the other without being absolutely sure...

[richie chishty]

Antonio:

 

<p>

 

Why don't you try to sell your Nikon gear on EBAY? That is exactly

what I did before buying a new M6 TTL and 35/f2 ASPH lens last year.

I have never regretted it because the all manual and mechanical Leica

is a joy to use after the auto everything Nikons and Canons I used to

have.

 

<p>

 

For street photography, I would recommend the 35mm over the 50mm. The

greater angle of coverage and depth of field helps a lot. I have

taken photos at public events with the 35mm lens set at f8 and

hyperfocal distance. For some examples, look here:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=67273.

 

<p>

 

The quality of the Leica lenses was so much better than my Nikon and

Canon lenses that I also bought a used Leicaflex SL and 60mm/f2.8

macro lens last summer. That is one amazing lens. You can use all

Leica lenses at maximum aperture and still get great results.

 

<p>

 

Since you also need a portrait lens, I would recommend the Leica M

90mm/f2 APO ASPH lens to complement the 35mm street photography lens.

You will have to save up for a while to buy this, but it will be worth

it.

 

<p>

 

It will take you several months to get used to the M6. But the

technical quality of your slides or prints will be dramatically

better.

 

<p>

 

So go for i

[bobtodrick]

I'd agree with the people who've said go for the M but keep your

Nikon. There are a number of things that the M does better than

any camera in the world (and street shooting is one of them), but

there are some things that are either impossible, or so

inconvenient that they are next to impossible. I sold a complete

Olympus kit when I got my Leica, only to find out a few months

later when I needed to do some copy slides of my work that I

needed the SLR w/macro. Something I don't need to do often,

but when it comes up the Leica just doesn't do. As well, as

stated elsewhere, be prepared to give the Leica a few months to

grow on you. It is a totally different way of seeing, and it takes a

while. I found switching to the rangefinder to be an even bigger

challenge in seeing than picking up my Rollei and looking down

into the focusing screen. But if you take the time it will reward

you with the best image taking ability in 35mm.

[fhm_editor]

Antonio:

 

<p>

 

I was also infected by the virus last month and bought a M6TTL with

35 Summicron and 90mm Summicron, both pre-asph. Before, I was using a

similar 35mm format set up as you, but in Canon EOS system (EOS-1N,

17-35L, 50USM, 70-210). And I bought the Leica for exactly the

reasons you stated: weight and stealth. I should tell you what I

think so far.

 

<p>

 

The little M6 obviously is very light and silent. No other camera

system will do better in these respects. The punch line is that if

street and travel photography are your main interests, then the Leica

is your best tool available.

 

<p>

 

I originally opt for the 50 Summicron when I was buying the M6,

because I have used the 50mm for 4 years and I still prefer the

normal perspective more than the wider 35mm. The 35 Summicron,

however, is inevitably the most useful and valuable lens for Leica.

This is because that it has more depth of field than the 50mm, which

is critical when it comes to zone focusing. The lens is extremely

sharp, as sharp as my Canon 50/1.4USM (This is not an insult, Leica

fans, as the Canon is really really sharp. It is however the creamy

out of focus area that makes the 35 Summicron distinctive. Try

panning with this lens and you shall see magic. The blur is so nice...

 

<p>

 

The 90mm Summicron is also a very sharp lens, although I bought it at

a used price higher than average. This lens serves well as a second

lens, but I should have bought a 50 Summicron before this lens. Many

people may think that the 50 is redundant once you have a 35, but

their perspectives are actually quite far apart. I see them both as

my main lenses. The 90 Summicron focuses slower and often produces

out of focus images due to my inexperience, but I am positive that it

will become easier.

 

<p>

 

I knew very well at the time of purchase that the Leica will perform

very well. I have never doubted the performance of any camera or

lenses (except cheap P&S), but rather I have doubts on my ability to

fully utilize them. RF focusing is actually easier than I thought (I

used AF all the time in EOS, but manual focuses my Hasselblad). The

correct exposure, however, is not as easily obtained as I have

expected. I used the 2% fine spotmeter most of the time, and incident

meter in tricky situations. I thought that I have mastered exposure

techniques. The centerweighted meter is a large spotmeter that needs

some time to get familiar with.

 

<p>

 

After playing around for one week, I shot a concert with the 90 with

terrible overexposed, defocused photographs. One day after the

concert, I brought my M6 to my birthplace - Hong Kong, and I have

fumbled many great opportunities in 2 weeks' time. However, there are

a few photographs that are very good. I knew that I am in the phase

of trial and error. I came back to Canada and photographed my

girlfriend's University graduation. The Leica served as a family P&S

and delivers amazing results. Still, some exposure and focusing

problems persist. It takes time to get used to, and much patience is

needed. I feel like a beginner who makes horrible photographs.

 

<p>

 

Last night, I compared the images I took with Leica and Canon. I was

amazed to find that a few of the Leica photographs that I took in the

past month are among the best batch of my 7 year photo life. There

must be some kind of synergy between me and the Leica. I am very

happy that I bought a camera that suits me very well.

 

<p>

 

I do have some further suggestion for your proposed purchase. That

is, I disagree with Paul's suggestion to buy the Voigtlander to

experience the RF world (my apology to Paul). This is because it does

not make economic sense (I am an economist). If you happen to like

the RF, you would definitely opt for the Leica (trust me you would),

in which you will have to sell the Cosina equipment. New Cosina

depreciates much faster than used Leica. So, why not try out with

used Leica and so you can keep it if you like it. If you do not like

RF, then resell the Leica and you will lose less than the depreciated

value of Voigtlander.

Another suggestion is that you should keep your Nikon. Leica cannot

do everything for you, unless you are determined to give up

telephoto, macro, flash, multiple exposure. I did not sell my Canon

and Hasselblad, not until I find them sitting at home most of the

time. Unfortunately, for the past month, they are sitting at home

most of the time.

 

<p>

 

Cheers,

Jackson Loi

University of Toronto

Economics Department

 

[phil_stiles3]

Why don't you pick up a Canonet? A definite Leica clone for $100,

which will give you some rangefinder experience. For hand held shots

with fast film, it might be all you need. (I know, heavy heresy

here!) Check out http://www.cameraquest.com/canql17.htm and

http://www.netaxs.com/~cassidy/images/equipment/ql17/index.html

[ron gregorio]

I too went through this dilemma, but I still kept my Nikon F90 and

FM2 (plus pro lenses and flash) system. I bought a second hand M2

body and 50/2 Summicron instead of a new M6. The second hand market

can be an option as well. My suggestion is to keep the SLR and get a

second hand M body and lens if budget is too tight for a new M6.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

So you do street photography, with a nikon, now you deserve a leica,

you can try any other rangefinder just to see the feel, but...

try the leica it can be a M4P or M6 whatever you can afford, with a

35/2, that´s a GREAT combination for street photo, you can ad later

an old elmar 90 for portraits for very cheap; what I´m sure is that

your photographic horizons will expand whit the Leica, I bet on that!

 

<p>

 

Nikons are a joke, specialy newer stuff.I don´t mean to hurt no one

feelings, but yesterday I was holding a N90s with a nikkor zoom and

belive me it was falling apart, and with all that butons I rather be

playing nintendo.

[angus_ngtg]

Hi Antonio,

 

<p>

 

I used to use Canon gear. I had an EOS1N, EOS3, and a 20-35, 70-200

and a 24-85. I sold all if it after I stopped working at a daily

newspaper and purchased 2 M6's & 24, 35, 50, and 90 mm lenses. Now

that I'm shooting mostly what I enjoy I would never go back to the

Nikon-Canon systems. If you want to do street work Leicas are by far,

IMHO, the best cameras to do it. Most of the work I do is on the

street and I can move around with a light package and without being

obtrusive. There is nothing wrong with the Nikon/Canon cameras, I

just don't feel that those systems are nearly as useful as the Leica

system for what you say you want to do.

 

<p>

 

Most of the things I shoot on the street are done with 2 lenses, the

35mm and the 50mm. For me, those two are the most valuable for street

shooting. You would certainly have to get used to using the Leica

system but if and when you do I think you will find that it is the

right camera for street photography.

 

<p>

 

T. Gallagher

[mark_johnson3]

Antonio:

I used Nikon in the early 70's, switched to M3's and then bought

more Nikon gear. I got rid of all of the Nikon gear and bought a

used R4 for when I wanted Macro or Long lens capabilities two years

ago. I use a 28 Elmarit, 50 and 90 Summicrons with an M6 and M3. If

you get a used M6, it is difficult switching to the M6TTL as the

shutter speed dial rotates in the opposite direction. In black and

white the Leica optics snap at you more than the competition does.

Ask around and see if anyone you knows has one you can handle and try

focusing with. I would not be happy with a clone, and the Canonet

concept is not even worth looking at as the quality and non-

interchangeable lenses are not a worthy comparison. Good luck, it is

your choice and you have to live with it.

 

<p>

 

Mark J.

[msitaraman]

"I have switch to a M6TTL + 35 Summicron ASPH about 2 months ago. I

have given a F100 with MB15, 28-70 AFS, 105 Macro, 80-200 AFS, 20mm

f/2.8 and 300 f/4 EDIF for just the above one body plus 1 lens. "

 

<p>

 

Steven Teh, if you are saying that's the equipment trade you did, I

wish I had been on the other side of the deal from you... :-)

 

<p>

 

Antonio, don't give up that Nikon system! In its own way, it is very

much a classic configuration, that can do many things your Leica

cannot.

 

<p>

 

I migrated to Leica M from a Nikon FM/50 like you had because the

control layout is quite similar. My suggestion, bite the bullet and

buy yourself an M4-P user with a 50/2 or a 35/2 on ebay or elsewhere

and use it exclusively for 3 months. Then you will know whether you

should chuck your Nikon gear.

 

<p>

 

If I were you, I would not do it-the Nikon lets you do many things in

a versatile way (Macro, Sports, Wildlife, Kids running around).

 

<p>

 

Until you get comfortable with a Leica style of seeing and taking

pictures <b><i>and are happy with having only that style in your

bag</b></i> it makes no sense to dump the SLR system.

[art_karr]

Antonio:

 

<p>

 

I haven't done this for money in some time: STOP. I use Nikon

and Leica M: STOP. The lenses give different results; one is not

really better than the other; just depends on the film and the

lighting; STOP. Decide what fits the subject for the shoot and the

film you will use and pick one: STOP. Shoot film and don't worry

so much about equipment: STOP. And when you really want to

get picky, change to 8 x 10 and do Pt prints: STOP.

 

<p>

 

More seriously, just have fun with whatever you do.

 

<p>

 

Art

[mark_wrathall]

I did what you are thinking of. I got a beat up M2 and 50 summicron.

They are wonderful, but I ended up buying an EOS 50 with 28/85 and 28-

105 lenses plus flash. The Leica is great, especially the lens, but

rather inflexible.

 

<p>

 

Do you like your current nikon glass? If you are happy with it, buy a

used FM.

[mark_wrathall]

I'm in Austria, and at present we europeans can really benefit from

the weak erup to get great prices on ebay. I sold my 28-80L that way,

[xav]

I guess Antonio received more answers than he expected...

My advice: Jump. Sell your Nikon and buy your M6 + 35 mm. Then

shoot, shoot and shoot. After a few months if you cannot feel

comfortable with a rangefinder, you should be able to sell you M at

around the same price you bought it (and buy back some Nikon stuff).

Since I switched to an M, I rediscovered the pleasure to take

pictures. I don't care for long focal lenghts (no wild life pictures

for me). For Macro photo, which I do once in a while I got an old

Pentax with bellows for peanuts...

 

<p>

 

Go for it man.

 

<p>

 

Xavier

[Robin Smith]

Antonio

 

<p>

 

I think that buying an M is a bit of a leap of faith - you will miss

reflex viewing - remember all the people who participate here are

Leica M fans - but there are many people who just cannot get on with

them - to some extent I include myself in this group. I am a Leica R

user. Personally, I think what you need to wean yourself off first is

the concept of the do-it-all zoom lens - this is what most people use

all the time and in my opinion it does little for your photography.

With an M (with the exception of the Tri-Elmar which is not really a

zoom) there are no zooms and so your photographic style has to change.

I suggest you use your Nikon with the 24mm the 50mm and maybe get a

nice fast Nikon 85 or 100 lens and use just this combo for a good few

months. You have already shed weight by dumping the zoom. You now have

only three lenses - like you might have in a typical M-kit. See how

you get on. Then if you think you can live with just this then you

need to see whether you could live with this and with a rangefinder.

Remember if the real aim is to simplify your photography you can do

that by keeping your reflex and loosing some of the lenses. You don't

need to bankrupt yourself getting an M to do this. Much as I love M

cameras - I still prefer the WYSIWG approach of reflexes and what many

people consider to be "classic Leica photography" can easily be done

by reflexes too. So, like everyone else says, don't get rid of your

Nikon even if you get an M - you might want it back! Remember too that

although the M cameras are smaller they are not particularly light.

Also, unless you keep with only 2 or 3 lenses you can still give

yourself a headache worrying and wondering about which lenses you want

and what to take with you - in other words just buying an M camera

does not automatically simplify things unless you really want it to!

You can end up buying a lot of Leica lenses! I sound like an addiction

counsellor...The M is not a necessarily a panacea and I suggest you

think very carefully about what your photographic objectives really

are.

[jackflesher]

>My main interest in photography is street, some portraiture and

night photography.<

 

<p>

 

Tom: If that is a true statement by you, the M is the perfect choice

and you will not be dissatisfied - But you will have to work to get

comfortable with it.

 

<p>

 

>I love my camera, >>(F100 24/2.8 50/1.4 70-210/4, SB22s, extension

tubes)<< it has much more than I'll ever need. But it's big,

obtrusive, and quite noisy compared to a RF.<

 

<p>

 

I love(d) my Nikons too, but you'll probably see them on eBay in the

next month or so, because they spend their time sitting in the

cabinet and the M's are always with me. Just to be sure, I

photographed my 11-year-old's end-of-school party last week with my

F100, big motor and zoom. I shot two rolls, got about two good images

and lots of properly exposed and well focussed frames full of forced

poses and boring snapshots.

 

<p>

 

>I usually don't carry all the equipment togheter because I like to

go as light as possible down the streets, and being nearly

unnoticeable.<

 

<p>

 

I photographed my 8 year old's birthday party yesterday with my M

(with motor) and 3E - VERY light, very quiet, very flexible. Only two

kids seemed to notice that I was even taking pictures, and then only

briefly, even with the motor.

 

<p>

 

Sincerely,

 

<p>

 

A former autoeverything SLR lover and M convert