Digital holiday

[steve_harris10]

I've been shooting with Nikon DSLRs for a few years now

( ) and I really enjoy it, but I find

that I'm nostalgic for the good(?) old days of rangefinder and film. Though by

contrast I don't miss film SLRs at all.

 

I last shot with a rangefinder 15 years ago or so. I'm contemplating buying a

Leica, as I've always wanted one, but could never afford it.

 

What worries me though is that I'll spend a thousand or two pounds on something

pretty, then it will sit on a shelf gathering dust. Is there anyone else here

that's done the same thing thing, and do you find that you use the film camera much?

 

I live in London, so there's a reasonable selection of shops that sell Leica

gear near me, but what would be the best single body+lens combination that won't

break the bank or be too hard to find. I'm thinking M6 + a 35mm lens of some

kind, but advice welcome. Do I have to be careful about buying a pup? I've no

idea how you check rangefinder mechanisms for focusing accuracy and so on.

 

Thanks in advance,

Steve

[stuart_richardson]

Not that Leica is a bad choice, but if you just want a good rangefinder to shoot some film

with and get a feel for it, something like a Bessa R2a with a 35mm or 50mm lens would be a

good choice. Voigtlander lenses tend to be very good and I doubt they will disappoint you. If

you knew you wanted to get a rangefinder and planned to use it, I would say get a Leica and

be done with it, but if you just want something to get a feel for it again, it's hard to go wrong

with a voigtlander. If you decide you like it, you can always move to a Leica if you feel the

need.

[ronald_moravec1]

Used old Leicas are tricky. I rarely see one that does not need some kind of repair(s). In experienced people usually woud not find the defects. I would recommend the Besa also as it is at least new and comes with a warrantee.

 

Now you need a darkroom or film scanner.

[Troll]

In London you should be able to rent a Leica for a few days. If you decide to by, you can probably get your money back for the rental -- if not, you've saved a bundle!<P>As you mentioned, I'd agree that a M6 with 35mm Summicron is the best starting combination.

[erikhaugsby]

<i>Used old Leicas are tricky. I rarely see one that does not need some kind of repair(s). In experienced people usually woud not find the defects. I would recommend the Besa also as it is at least new and comes with a warrantee. </i><br><br>

I'm sorry, but that statement is just not true.<br>Many times if a Leica has been purchased from a source like eBay it is advisable to have it sent for a CLA (Cleaning, Lubricating, Adjustment) to ensure beyond any doubt that it will function perfectly, though this is far from nessecary.<br>Also, Leica repair facilities aren't slouches--DAG or Sherry Krauter (in the US) or CRR (in the UK) can perform miracles on cameras, and I've never heard of any of them actually missing a "defect."

[HarryBaker]

Steve, I was in your position 2-3 years ago. I was using Canon DSLRs and still do (Canon 5D). But I was so attracted by the feel of a rangefinder. I got a classic M6 with a 35mm Voigtlander Ultron F1.7 and I just love using it. But you may find that film can be a bit of a disppointment. I use colour print film (Fuji or Kodak) which I get processed and scanned at hi res by my university photography department. They are pretty good but when I've used Jessops/Snappy or other high street processors I've often been disappointed. Of course if you go with Tri-X and home processing...that's the classic combination. You may also miss the immediacy of digital. Film does take time! If you buy from RG Lewis (Holborn) or from Classic (Pied Bull Yard) or Caplan (off Jermyn Street) then you will pay top price but can be certain that any problems will be dealt with. I would never buy from *Bay. I suggest an M6 with a 35mmCV to see whether you like it. Or a Hexar RF, which does everything that an M7 can do. But be warned. If you buy a Bessa or a Hexar, you will buy a Leica! It is a drug. I now have an M8 which I hoped would be a compromise between the immediacy of digital and the feel of a RF. But I still spent yesterday out with my M6 and film and just one lens!

[len_smith]

Steve,

 

I would suggest a different route.

 

Try shooting with a classic 1970s fixed lens rangefinder camera, such as a Canonet G-III QL17, a Yashica Electro 35 GSN or GTN, or an Olympus 35 RC or RD. If you really enjoy shooting with one of these cameras, but eventually find it somewhat limited, then (and only then) should you consider spending a lot of money on a Leica.

 

These cameras are easily found on the well-known auction site or at one of the secondhand camera dealers in London. They are reliable and have excellent lenses that bear comparison with much more expensive glass. Most have battery issues because the old mercury batteries are no longer available, but there are well-established workarounds for that.

 

Try to get one that has recently been serviced (CLA) or that has at least had the light seals replaced. Budget GBP 100 for a very good one and perhaps a little more for one with CLA, new light seals and a warranty.

 

Finally, as another Leica alternative, consider a Konica Hexar, a beautiful, modern autofocus compact with an outstanding 35mm f/2 lens - probably the nearest you will ever get to a "Japanese Summicron". These regularly appear on the well-known auction site at about GBP 250 to 300.

 

The AF is very accurate and the lens is a gem. Early black models had a "silent" option which emitted less noise than just about any other camera with a shutter. The later silver model omitted that option, but was otherwise identical. The only drawback is that the fastest shutter speed is 1/250 sec, which precludes using the lens wide open in daylight, even with slow film.

 

There was also a later Hexar RF with interchangeable lenses. This was effectively a competitor to the Leica M7, although it pre-dated the M7 by some months. It was a superb camera, but there were some issues of compatibility with Leica glass that have never been satisfactorily resolved. This camera is less reliable than a Leica M and spare parts are extremely difficult to find. I use two Hexar RF bodies but would not recommend them to others, such are the problems with getting them repaired.

 

I hope the above gives you some food for thought.

 

Tony

[GlennS]

I've come from the other direction. Have been a Leica user for close to forty years and ended up buying a D200 last year. The D200 is a fantastic camera, but will never replace my M4's for some types of shooting. Leica is relatively compact and is my carry everywhere camera. With a wide lens it's ideal for the slice of life type shots that HCB became famous for. I can't imagine using using the D200 for unobtrusive shooting because of the size and shutter noise. There is no perfect camera for every situation, each has its pluses and negatives. Best to get one or two of each type and use the right tool for the job. Who would consider taking their car to a mechanic who's only tools are an adjustable wrench and a hammer? .... ;-)

[gadge]

Hi Steve,

 

I agree that M6 or M6-TTL with a 35mm lens would be a good choice if you decide to go for it. Summicron's are expensive and not that much better than an Ultron or 40mm Rokkor/Summicron-C options but would be easy to resell if you change your mind.

 

Take a look at www.ffordes.com too. They are in Scotland but offer money back guarantee if unhappy.

 

I don't really understand why you actually need one and suspect it may be want rather than need. But hey...you say that you have always wanted one and you only live once.

[robert loop]

I f you want a real historical Leica , take the M5 with a 50 mm. M5 are not expensive, not as

"famous" as the M2 or M6 but a real old time camera....

But if you want a small Leica do not choose the M5.For use and by far the Zeiss is the best

ever...

[marek_fogiel]

Steve,

The main reason why you might enjoy shooting film, is B&W - digital is simply not rendering the tones and resolution as well. If you put on top of it the pleasure to shoot with a small camera equipped with a fantastic lens, which you can focus well even in very dim light, and with which you can frame your shots in a very effective manner, then a RF still has a lot of appeal.

I feel, that to get the best performance ovarall (without taking a mortgage), in terms of ease of use (aperture priority autoexposure), framing and focussing (BIG bright viewfinder and long rangefinder base), lens quality (fantastic performance at acceptable prices) is to be found in the Zeiss Ikon camera with the Zeiss lenses. Mind you, unless you get a first rate film scanner, the thing doesn't make sense, so add a coolscan 5000 or better to your purchase list.

[steve_harris10]

Thanks for all your responses. Very helpful.

 

This is definitely a case of want not need! The thing I miss is the immediacy of cameras designed to be operated manually, which more "modern" rangefinders don't have.

 

The D200 is pretty obtrusive, and especially fast AF zoom lenses are big, but I don't find that to be too much of a problem. I've got a tiny Panasonic/Leica branded 16:9 compact thing (I don't remember the model number) that gets good quality images at ISO100, probably better than I'd get with generic 35mm film and highstreet processing, but I just don't enjoy using it that much. Too fiddly and the lack of viewfinder is awkward.

 

Money is not really the issue (hence why I'm not that interested in buying a optically similar cheaper option), but I would feel bad about taking a perfectly functioning camera off the market. If I don't buy the Leica I'll just spend the money on a SLR lens :) Also the cost of the chemistry and the amount I shoot means that I'd spend more in film and processing than on a cheaper camera anyway.

 

I want to handle the camera and lens before I buy as ergonomics is the main point, so I'll definitely buy somewhere I can try it out.

 

Going for a 3rd party lens is a good option though, shots I've seen on Flickr taken with Voigtlander lenses certainly seem fine, do they focus smoothly and have a good feel to the aperture rings? They don't seem that common in London though, from looking at websites. Does anyone know a dealer that stocks some? It seems like there are some that require M-mount adapters, and some that are natively M-mount, does it make a big difference?

 

[OT] My feeling is that modern optics are so good that ergonomics is more important, I've bought Nikkors over less expensive lenses that are optically as good (eg. 12-24 range), because the 3rd party lenses generally don't feel right. All the quality glass in the world won't help me take a good photo if the handling is all wrong.

[Troll]

Steve, your attitude is refreshing!

[neal_martin]

Like you, I wanted a smaller alternative to DSLR (monster gear that I still use at work)----but did not want to give up quality, and had a stronger "want" for a Leica than I foresaw.

 

Questions: Did I like the RF size, feel, focusing? I collected and used a CAnonetQLIII; Yashica Lynx, and a GSN. Very nice. Also got a Bessa L and CV 21. Did I like film? Not really. I appreciate the vintage BW (Tri-X) look, but it's hard enough for me to avoid photo cliches without the medium speaking so loudly through each shot.

 

I scanned color negs and worked with these a while and saw no appreciable difference between the digital images that came from my scanner and those that came out of my 1DMkII (except my Canon glass was better than my fixed-lens RFs).

 

Besides, I have a large "investment" (speaking of experience as well) in digital post processing PS/CS3. Why give that up?

 

Answer: M8. All that I hoped for. I'd guess that my film RF "phase" cost about $5-600. Of that I might recoup 75%. Not bad for a few months of learning and experimenting to gain peace of mind in making the Leica M8 leap.

Martin

[astral]

I agree fully with the suggestion to try a fixed lens rangefinder like a Canon QL17 (or preferably a model that takes regular silver batteries). Try to use one for a few days, rather than hours. They generally have the same pro's and cons as a Voigtlander Bessa or Leica, etc, but at a small fraction of the cost. If you can't live with the limitations that rangefinder cameras impose - especially the viewfinder arrangement, lack of depth of field preview, and so on, compared to a slr - then the cost penalty is small.

 

If you become committed to a Leica M have a look at MW Classics website: they are much more reasonably priced for bodies than the Central London dealers, though their lens selection is usually small. AC

[steve_harris10]

Update: I bought an M6 0.72 TTL with a (very beaten up) 50mm Summicron and a 35mm CV Ultron. I've put 3 films through it in the last day and a half, 1 colour, 2 B&W. Enough to confirm that I still don't really like the look of 35mm colour film, the B&W shots look great though.

 

I really like the handling and size of the camera, it was exactly the change of style I was after. Time will tell whether the rangefinder handling outweighs the disadvantages of film :) I guess if I like it too much I'll get an M8 at some point.

 

The 35mm lens in particular seems like a really good fit the way of working, and I got back into the swing of things pretty quickly. The only thing that's stumped me so far is having to take my eye from the viewfinder to see what aperture I've got set.

 

Many thanks for all your advice. I'll be sure to hang around on this forum to pick up some tips.