Logic vs. emotions

[john15]

I find the heft and feel of the M6 a pleasure. It is a camera that a

blind man could love simply for the tactile experience. However, the

framing is so imprecise, at least with the 50mm Elmar, that I find

myself with the Nikon FM3A in hand most of the time. BTW, the 45mm,

2.8P Nikon seems to produce photographs that are at least as good as

those made with the Elmar. They are both fine lenses.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

Hey Niels great topic like this are needed to share what here suposed

to be share, thank´s Niels.

 

<p>

 

i am of those that think the M is a great pice of design in many

levels, I could and do look and hold a M body and enjoy and

apreciate it´s design, i don´t need to take pictures to do it.

 

<p>

 

About it´s great optical qualities, I´m sure they exsist, but I

belive my kind of photography can´t show all of them.

 

<p>

 

a thing I don´t agree with you Niels is when you say:

 

<p>

 

"My M4 and the 50mm Summicron have not improved my photography, but

the feel of the camera has renewed my joy of photography (which in

time hopefully will translate into better photographs)."

 

<p>

 

I am for sure aware of the improve in my photography that the M leica

has made, and is been through it´s finder; and reliablenes; and

comfort of use; and confidence in the system that it has help me in

achieve a better image of a percived place.

 

<p>

 

For sure the M finder gives me more to evaluate of the final picture

in it´s clear, contrasty and direct M finder than a SLR in their

exact, dim, tigth and soft focusing screen, and that is important to

me, far more than auto exposure or auto any thing, there are pictures

i can´t make with another camera, but by chance.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

Afer many etherities and many many lives, we´ll remind the 20th

century on earth for many things for sure and some for the use of the

leicas, or maybe leicas can be seen in other worlds through ethernity

as a gift from god.

 

<p>

 

Dear Bill nice to read from you, well in case you are really you ;),

(I don´t forget;) and you haven´t made that description neather.

[eliot]

George Berger is absolutely right. I have keratoconus (curvature of

the cornea), which is not correctible by simple diopters. Yet I can

probably focus an M camera as well if not better than someone with

20/20 vision. The focussing is positive and from my years of

experience, I can do it quickly and accurately. The alternative for

me would be autofocus (I can't focus a MF SLR, unless it has a focus

confirmation light!), and I would bet the M is more accurate within

its focal length range.

 

<p>

 

The M system takes more patience to learn well than an AF SLR, but it

is a wonderfully capable tool when used properly. There is no

question the M is not for everyone (understandably). You have to

spend more money and learn its idiosynchrasies and its strengths and

how to exploit them. But it is all I really need, since I'm not into

long telephotography or extreme closeups of bugs. About the only

thing I miss with the M system is a PC (tilt-shift) lens, which is a

far more useful lens than most people imagine. For this I bought a

Canon EOS 24/3.5 TS lens and a cheap EOS body.

[gerald4]

<I>"What are largely held up as examples of the best of Leica M

photography are basically happy accidents, even if couched in

the euphemism of the "decisive moment". </I>

 

<p>

 

The strength of M largely lies in its merits from the viewfinder

(likewise all the rest of rangefinders). You see the subjects (without

blackout) as you click. Besides the subject matters in the frame, you

see those outside of the frame as well (which makes elements

addition/substraction to/from the frame relatively fast and

"decisive"). It is a different way of *seeing*, thus requiring a

different way of approaching the photography. M as its limits and we

all know what they are. Though if anyone still thinks M produces

nothing but happy accidents, it proves the M way of seeing (or

rangefinder way of seeing) is not for everyone. Optical & build

quality aside, the M way of seeing is the primary reason why I love

shooting with my M.

[david_killick]

Al hit the nail on the head: "There is definitely something other than

logic involved with buying Leica gear."

 

<p>

 

It's emotion. Few man-made products engender such an emotional

response except perhaps fine classic sportscars.

 

<p>

 

Because it performs brilliantly as well, it has extra appeal.

 

<p>

 

Also, it's an anachronism but a delightful anachronism: a tribute to

craftsmanship and purity of form and function in a throwaway world.

[Niels - NHSN]

<b>Thanks for all the response!</b> <BR>

And thanks to those reassuring me that I will see improvement

eventually. <BR>

I am actually quite pleased that the operation of the camera felt

natural from the start, and that I didn't feel I had to take a step

back on the learning curve.

 

<P>Eliot wrote: "<I>This is hardly a stone age camera</I>".<BR>

-You are right of course. I was thinking specifically of my M4, which

isn't very different from the original M3. Sorry it wasn't clear.</P>

 

<P>K G wolf wrote: "<I>I do not know for how long you are using your

LEICA M</I>"<BR>

-For almost a year now, -I think you have a good point; It is easier

to bring my camera along wherever I go = more photographs = more

experience = better photographs.</P>

 

<P>Jaques wrote: "<I>I find very similar tactile and

intellectual pleasure in handling R</I>"<BR>

- I think that is great, and if I felt the same way, that would be

sufficient justification for me.</P>

 

<P>Marc wrote: "<I>Every selected neg has an equally hard to

explain emotional quality and tonal range that blows away everything

else</I>"<BR>

-It is very likely that my experiences w. optical quality relates to

my choice of processing. I am actually setting up a darkroom to

improve control of the process. (I already spend most of my day in

front of a computer screen, and the prospect of spending even more

time in the digital 'darkroom' doesn't really sound attractive)</P>

 

<P>Mike wrote: "<I>This statement alone seperates you from

being a photographer to being a camera buff</I>"<BR>

-Maybe I am, but I don't quite see how valuing a tool for its less

tangible qualities makes me more of a buff, than if I value a camera

for its optical qualities. (See Al's post).</P>

 

<P>LeicaLux wrote: "<I>when I die I want to be burried with my

Leica</I>"<BR>

-Now this is a camera buff :-)</P>

 

<P>Michael wrote: "<I>Almost any SLR todayis so automated that

I don't know how to reset something</I>"<BR>

-You captured most of my feelings in your post. I too felt that the

complexity of a modern Nikon slowed me down (always double checking

if all the settings were as I wanted them to be).</P>

 

<P>George wrote: "<I>The M series are godsends for the Old Fud

crowd!</I>"<BR>

-Wonderful reassuring post! -I am looking forward to many years of

service from my M4 -I'm glad they are well supported.</P>

 

<P>Kristian wrote: "<I>Unfortuantely for me, it is no longer

possible</I>"<BR>

-Kristian, I read your other post and I am sorry you feel such

drastic measures are nessessary. I will not try to talk you out of

it; I have been in situations myself where priorities dictated

selling of beloved equipment (but I found out that even a Stylus Epic

is a quite capable camera and can be satisfiying in its own right).

</P>

 

<P>Karl wrote: "<I>The longevity of the classic M design is a

statement in itself</I>"<BR>

- It sure is. In principle I think all designs can be improved, but

to improve the M design would surely be a challenge. How often

haven't we seen 'improvements' which in fact was quite the

opposite?</P>

 

<P>Al wrote: "<I>There is definitely something other than logic

involved with buying Leica gear.</I>"<BR>

-Agree!</P>

 

<P>Jay wrote: "<I>Some say the Leica M is inspirational in its

feel</I>"<BR>

-I love that way of putting it! "tempermental" is also a great word.

Although I have no experience to support it, I think you may be right

about "shelf life". </P>

 

<P>Jeff wrote: "<I>why should they go to waste."<BR>

</I>-Well said, don't let them go to waste!</P>

 

<P>John wrote: "<I>I find myself with the Nikon FM3A in hand

most of the time. BTW, the 45mm, 2.8P Nikon seems to produce

photographs that are at least as good as those made with the

Elmar</I>."<BR>

-That is the combo I would likely be using -if Leica didn't

exist.</P>

 

<P>R Watson wrote: "<I>confidence in the system that it has

help me in achieve a better image of a percived place.</I>"<BR>

-I'll be there -soon -I hope :-)</P>

 

<P>Gerald wrote: "<I>You see the subjects (without blackout) as you

click</I>."<BR>

- I didn't realise how annoying I find the blackout until I got my

Leica.</P>

 

<P>Thanks to everyone for posting.</P>