What is Leica Photography?

[michael_devoue]

I recently posted a link to a fairly recent image I shot (with an F3 and 55/2.8) in order to have it critiqued. I got a few responses, but one in particular disturbed me- I was told I was in the wrong forum!

I thought this was absurd, so let me explain.

 

<p>

 

The Leica came about in 1924 (I think), and I'm sure many will agree with me when I say that they popularized 35mm for the masses. Of course, Henry Ford would have had to have been an idiot to think that he would be the only one to build an automobile. So too, Leica probably expected many competitors to adopt the configuration of their cameras. Admirably, Leica had remained relatively true to the original design, which explains their cult following today.

 

<p>

 

But what is Leica doing with a reflex system? A moving mirror? I'm sure you will all agree with me when I say that for some types of photography, the SLR is preferable. I'm sure more would agree with me when I say that for some types of photography, the Rangefinder is preferable. Nevertheless, Leica makes a reflex, complete with AE bodies. Does this mean that one who simply uses (or more correctly, owns) Leicas is practicing Leica Photography? I don't think so...

 

<p>

 

In the entire scope of photography, there are a lot of possiblities, many possibly unexplored. Using a Pinhole vs. a TLR vs. Pen+Ink+Camera Obscura can yield wildly different results.

 

<p>

 

Street shots? Learn to use the AF on an Olympus Stylus, turn the flash off, Load some fast film, and I'm sure you'll be surprised.

 

<p>

 

Tonality? Get A LF camera. Have to handhold it? Get a MF rangefinder.

 

<p>

 

Portraiture? Just pick a camera and get on with it!

 

<p>

 

Within this scope of possibilities, I admittedly am within a narrow sliver, shooting B+W stictly, processing and printing myself, limiting myself to the 35mm SLR and a handful of good primes. This is how I like to shoot. Often times it's handheld. Sometimes I'll flip the mirror up to reduce shutter lag, guessing where in the frame my subject will fall(surprising what hyperfocal+4 f.p.s. can do). Other times, I need to (and look forward to using) use my tripod. At a relatively low cost, I am able to take care of my shooting needs with equipment that satifies me. It just happens to be a Nikon. I doubt an equivalent R system would change my shooting style or images. An M, however, probably would change my shooting style, and thus, my images would change too. I can't say how, but give me an M and I'll show you :-)

 

<p>

 

Leica Photography(to me) means excellent 35mm image quality and has little to do with equipment. If you disagree, maybe we should destroy this forum (Oh no- what would Alfie do? Work??) and split into two camps, "Leica M Photography" and "Leica R photography". That may be tragic, however, as this is a very popular forum. That's why I posted here. I wanted responses from shooters who think photography (an image is worth much more than 1000 words), rather than just speak it. Here is where I have found them. Unfortunately, some Ferrari owners rave about the ride, but have been waxing it more than driving it. So too, I'm sure many who frequent this forum spend more time looking at their cameras rather than their images. Yes, the Leica is beatiful, but you aren't a photographer because you own one. You just own a Leica. Photographers use them. And Nikon. And Canon. And Contax. Photographers are those who pursue the image, not simply a camera. I love coming to a place such as this to communicate with Photographers.

I understand the allure that is Leica, and fine if you are wrapped up in fondling Leicas, you belong here! It's OK, you can admit it! But don't claim to be a local circuit racer if all you do is wax.

 

<p>

 

Leica Photography means Excellent 35mm Images, if you were to ask me. Photographers pursuing such should be welcome here as well. You might help "convert" them, whether image or equipment-wise.

[alfie wang]

In some ways I do agree with you on that point. I got some major flak

in my argument that the Nikon F Photomic design was superior to the

design of the Leicaflex/SL during that same era despite the superior

optics of the Leica from that time period. Of course I enjoy using my

Leicaflex but it is rather unwieldly to use because of its weight and

fairly sizable grip.

 

<p>

 

Of course, I think that I posted a few of my pictures and got some

good reception and a lot of criticism. Of course I'm still learning

about Leica photography and you have to admit that a guy with Leica

R4 for only a few weeks can't be a master all that quickly.

 

<p>

 

Alfie

[dan_brown4]

But, the stated purpose of this forum is to discuss Leica related

stuff. If your arguments are accepted, this would become like the

unmoderated forum on photo.net. I think you post was

innappropriate, and I chose not to comment. No offense

intended. You might ask for critiques on the photo.net critique

section. You'll probably get more responses there anyway.

[wilhelm]

As far as I am aware, a critique of baby pictures made with a Nikon

has nothing to do with "Leica Photography." It belongs, where it was

posted, on Photo.Net.

[dan_brown4]

More specifically, the stated purpose is:

 

<p>

 

This forum is for discussing Leica cameras and any associated

equipment in the persuit of great photography. You are

encouraged to post any questions, or contribute any answers,

about Leica photography.

[michael_devoue]

Again, what is Leica Photography?

 

<p>

 

<I>More specifically, the stated purpose is:

This forum is for discussing Leica cameras and any associated

equipment in the persuit of great photography. You are encouraged to

post any questions, or contribute any answers, about Leica

photography. </I>

 

<p>

 

Discussing Leica Cameras <u>and</u> ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT IN

THE PURSUIT OF GREAT PHOTOGRAPHY.

 

<p>

 

Or is the forum for discussing "Leica cameras and associated

equipment" primarily, with the second criteria, "the pursuit of great

photography". If so, many of you don't belong here because you are

not collecting cameras vs. images. Lucky you own a Leica, I guess.

 

<p>

 

So I take it I am not welcome because I don't own a Leica? Very

Elitist. Anyone disagree?

[michael_devoue]

And again, someone please define leica photography and how it differs

from non-leica photography.

[alfie wang]

Actually, Mike's post made me realize whether the Leica photography

forum can include pictures taken with Leica-compatiable rangefinders.

For example, Nikon used to make lots of RF lens in M39 mount back in

the early days and the question is whether mounting a Nikkor RF lens

on a Leica III can produce pictures which are allowed to be critiqued

on this forum instead of a photo from a Canon VT with that same

Nikkor lens. The question is what does "associated Leica items"

encompass?

 

<p>

 

I personally would believe that when I post pictures taken with a FED

II w/ Leica lens outfit (considering that my Leica IIIF is going to

DAG for repairs) that the pictures would be under the umbrella of the

LUSENET rules here :)

 

<p>

 

Alfie

[chris_chen4]

What's the big problem? Why is it "elitist" to limit discussion to

Leica-related topics in the, ahem, *Leica* Photography forum?

Someone who owns a Leica may not be practicing "Leica Photography" by

any definition; indeed they may not be taking photographs @ all.

However, one thing that *is* clear is that you can't practice Leica

photography without a Leica--otherwise, what is there to distinguish

it from "photography?" If you want to discuss "excellence in

photography" or whatever in a non-equipment-oriented atmosphere, there

are plenty of other fora on the internet that cover that ground. You

should even be able to discuss such topics on the numerous

Nikon-related fora. If they're not as popular or photography-oriented

as the Leica fora, which I doubt very much, well that's their problem!

[tony_rowlett2]

I disagree on the point that if photographs are posted by other makes

(like Nikon or other equipment) that it would bring the forum down to

the level of the unmoderated photo.net Q&A.

<p>

The thing I care most about is that Mike posted a beautiful

photograph. He could have easily withheld the fact that it was taken

with a Nikon. If so, what would we have done, ask him to prove it was

taken with a Leica? That's not what our forum is all about. So what

if it wasn't taken with a Leica. It sure could have been.

<p>

I do however understand Dan's and bmitch's point of view. I know

exactly what they're saying. But I would ask them (and others) to

consider this: Wouldn't you believe that a Leica forum would more

easily welcome a photograph taken with a Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Minolta

than a Nikon/Canon/Pentax/Minolta forum accepting a photograph taken

with a Leica camera? Think about it.<p>

Leica photography is not just about pictures taken with Leica cameras.

<p>

We have been divisive enough over the past weeks. Our discussions

here aren't even 100% about photography (and that is probably good).

Why wouldn't we welcome a post that <u>is</u> about photography?

<p>

I sometimes regret having started this forum as the "Leica

Photography" forum, because it is no longer obvious to me what that

actually means. Photography is much more interesting to me than

equipment. I don't like it that we are considered an "equipment-only"

forum. I can admire and participate in discussions about equipment,

but I am more interested in the style of photography that the Leica

originally fostered. I consider Mike's photograph here a healthy

example - a descendant - of what the Leica camera was originally

developed for.

<p>

These are just some of my own thoughts. Let's hear your opinions,

folks.

<p>

-Tony as a particpant, not a moderator

[paul8]

Whow, and I always thought that Leica Photographie is using my N/C/M

hitec body to photograph my lowtec Leicas. Medium format can be used

also!

[chris_chen4]

Tony:

 

<p>

 

IMO, I would have no problem discussing completely non-Leica-related

topics on the forum, so long as its name is changed

to something more descriptive & accurate (e.g.,"Excellence

in 35mm Photography"?). Truth in advertising!

[doug herr]

This forum is valuable to me because there is a good concentration of

photographers here who know quite a bit about making best use of

Leica, the cameras I am using, to make photographs. I don't mind

reading the occasional post about the advantages another camera may

have in some situations but I visit here because the signal-to-noise

ratio is good. Revise the focus of the forum and the s/n ratio drops

for me.

[bobtodrick]

Have to agree with the majority (so far) here. There are other forums

I frequent that are more general in scope than this one (and there are

lots of them). I come here to discuss Leica. I post my Rollei images

on the Rollei site as I assume that's what it's there for........

[dan_brown4]

Anybody a HAM radio operator? The neat thing about HAM radio

is that the members are self policed. Every now and then some

joker comes along and starts transmitting trash or violating the

reasonable rules of conduct. The other HAMs rally together and

force the joker off the air, then things get back to the way they

were. This has worked in the HAM community for 60 or 70 years.

 

<p>

 

In the opinion of Dan Brown (me), this Leica Digest should be

like a HAM community. It has a stated purpose and that is why I

visit here so frequently. I like Leicas, I like to talk about them. I

like to learn about them. I like to hear what other Lieca users

think about their Leicas. I would like all those who post

questions and answers here to conduct themselves in a civilized

way, and, limit the principal topic of each thread to the subject

matter of the forum. Otherwise, this might as well be an

un-moderated USENET forum.

 

<p>

 

Even more narrow-mindedly, photo-critiques that got to issues of

Leica bokeh, or corner sharpness, or image characteristics

seem fine, but, critiques based on artistic impressions and

composition are inconsistent with my view of what a Leica forum

should be.

 

<p>

 

Tony, it�s your forum, do what you like. The foregoing is merely

one visitor�s point of view.

[michael_devoue]

Well put, Doug. I like the s/n ratio- good analogy.

 

<p>

 

If there is such a thing as "Leica Photography" or "Nikon

Photography", I doubt I would fall into the latter camp, as Nikon

sales show that Zooms are far more popular than primes, and built-in

flash, dependence on batteries, etc. also being repeating themes.

Using primes, abandoning flash, and other back-to roots efforts has

been very rewarding. I know that here no-one will tell me to buy a

zoom, flash, or color film, for that matter. That's why I love this

forum.

[luther_berry]

Tony,

 

<p>

 

There seem to be two topics here: 1) HARDWARE/EQUIPMENT questions,

and 2) 35mm TECHNIQUES (USE of equipment). Should these two topics

be combined or separated? Should either of them be restricted to

Leica related equipment?

 

My preference would be to restrict the Hardware topic to Leica

related equipment for better in-depth coverage. But the Techniques

topic could be open to all 35mm equipment. Many 35mm photographic

techniques are not limited to a specific camera brand and could be

useful regardless of brand used. LB

[jay_.]

I have to agree with Doug. There are forums galore that deal with

general and subject-specific critiques of photography. There are also

forums that discuss practical-use issues regarding other marques.

With Leica, heretofore the other forums were (and still are) such

that whenever they happen to actually stumble back on topic, the

Leica-talk is all syrupy praise and homage and anyone daring to raise

a contrarian eyebrow is immediately and savagely flamed to a cinder.

I don't object to the mention of other brands, nor to the posting of

a picture not taken with a Leica--after all, many of us shoot with

more than one brand--but I wouldn't like to see the %-Leica content

of this forum go down.

[tse_sung_wu7]

It's about context. I hadn't owned a Leica when I started posting

here, and did not feel uninvited. I poked around and asked questions

as someone who was thinking of getting a Leica. If you had posted your

photo with some more context- are you interested in shooting with

Leica, and are you asking, "Here's a photo I did with a Nikon- will I

be able to get this or better with Leica?" I think it would've been

met with less criticism.

 

<p>

 

I think when you placed the photo for critique without any reference to

its relevance to the Leica Forum (which, as others state, is about

photography done with Leica equipment), people naturally wondered why

you were here.

 

<p>

 

Or- at least you could address that. Like, "I know this wasn't done by

a Leica, but it as what I think are Leica-esque qualities. What do you

think?"

 

<p>

 

What if you went to the Medium Format forum and posted your 35mm photo

there, with as little background as you did here- would you be terribly

surprised if people showed a little protest?

[jeff voorhees]

"A sense of achievement arises when intense involvement with the

product leads users to discover and perfect new capabilities and new

ways of seeing"

 

<p>

 

These words were copied directly from

the <a href="http://www.leica-camera.com/unternehmen/

philosophie/index_e.html">Leica Website</a>

 

<p>

 

Based on those words, one could make the argument that we should only

discuss Leica gear and images made with Leicas. That of course seems

hopelessly limiting to me. And it is a forum to which I would rather

not participate. Mr. DeVoue I'm with you. Tony, I think you do a

great job and I look forward to reading the posts of others who know

way more about Leicas than I ever will. But I also like hearing about

how others go about shooting, maybe with an M6 or a Fuji disposable.

 

<p>

 

I've always been fond of the saying: "Any tool in skilled hands will

yield acceptable results". If this is an "equipment only" forum,

maybe we can discuss hammers sometime. I own 5 or 6 and each has its

own specific use...

 

<p>

 

For most of my photographic life (20+ years) I shot with Pentax

equipment, but I knew at some point I wanted a Leica rangefinder.

I've only had that for 3 years. Based on some of the recent replies

to Mr. DeVoue, I would not be allowed to participate until I was "an

owner". Someday I'll post some images from my 50 Summicron and some

from my 50/1.7 K mount Pentax lens and some of you can try to guess

which is which. Does wanting a Leica rather than owning one

disqualify someone from participation? What books should we ban next?

 

<p>

 

Don't go away Mike.

[giles_poilu]

This is an interesting question but maybe the title of this

forum "Leica Photography" is misleading you (Mike)- perhaps it should

be named "Leica talk". I would imagine that most Leica users are

primarily of the mechanical M rangefinder models. Other people make

arguably better SLR's than Leica but at present no-one does a RF

quite like our German friends! This is Leica's forte and heritage

and a market they still have predominantly to themselves.

 

<p>

 

We like discussing Leica equipment, occasionally other manufacturers

get a mention but if you are a Nikon lover there are Nikon lovers out

there who club together just like us Leica devotees!

 

<p>

 

If you really want to delve into the meaning of Leica "photography"

then just look up the endless threads on "bokeh" or "tonality"

or "extension of one's eye" or "vision" or "thinking" etc, etc.

 

<p>

 

We talk here because we have discovered Leica; it IS different to

Nikon and Canon, not eliteist or better or even perfect, just,

different.

 

<p>

 

I use a Leica rangefinder because it is 100% mechanical (M4-P),

beautifully made and it does the job for which it is intended. It

may be silly to say but for me the whole Leica history can be felt in

your hands when you hold the M.

 

<p>

 

Incidently, if I was to buy an SLR again it would be a Nikon or

Canon, not a Leica. IMO for the features, and method of using an SLR

Leica cannot compete.

[harry_nelson]

Did someone really talk about radio hams earlier or did I dream that?

[michael_devoue]

<I>We talk here because we have discovered Leica; it IS different to

Nikon and Canon, not eliteist or better or even perfect, just,

different. </I>

 

<p>

 

Little would change if I had a 6.2 and similiar primes. If Nikon "got

a hold of me(af+zooms+color+flash)" it would change radically.

 

<p>

 

I'm sad you "discovered Leica". I would never claim such a thing.

Discovering a new way of shooting, however......

[Robin Smith]

Mike

 

<p>

 

Like others I don't see what your issue is: Leica Photography means

"photography using a Leica of any kind". If the forum is filled with

people talking about other cameras then it is no longer "Leica

photography" and we all leave the forum. In practice though all of us

pretty well are interested in photography and cameras in general, so

the odd totally off topic question is just fine. Some things are

strongly leica related such as the virtues of r/f cameras and so on.

But our ultimate reference and baseline is the Leica. So if you post a

shot taken by a Nikon and say "what do you think of this shot", you

should not be surprised if the odd person does say - why is this

relevant to a Leica forum? We were otherwise nice to you I seem to

remember weren't we?

[doug herr]

>>><BR>

Little would change if I had a 6.2 and similiar primes. If Nikon "got

a hold of me(af+zooms+color+flash)" it would change radically.

 

I'm sad you "discovered Leica". I would never claim such a thing.

Discovering a new way of shooting, however......

<br>

<<<

<P>

Mike, I was surprised how my way of shooting changed when I replaced

my Nikon FTn and Nikon primes with "similar" Leica reflex equipment.

I was never into the zooms, flash, and other automation-stuff that

comprises the majority of Nikon's sales now, I just swapped one

mechanical camera for another. The way the camera responded to my

hands, and the clearer, brighter images the lenses gave me, made it

possible to discover a new way of seeing and shooting. In my case,

much changed when I replaced the FTn with an SL and similar primes.