Getting Hold of Leica and Why?

[fabian_toulouse]

This may sound terribly naive, but what makes Leica cameras so sought after? I

understand the history, but as far as the user experience and the film

development, why should I be dancing through hoops for Leica?

[mharris]

My 1937 IIIa still feels as smooth as silk. My new DSLR just came back from repair. That should explain why I always carry one.

[thinkofcole]

Owning a Leica is something akin to owning a Patek Philippe, a Picaso, a Rolls Royce, a share of stock in Berkshire Hathaway...They are all the best there is and if you have one of any of them, they will last a lifetime...

[sw12dz]

There is nothing mystical about Leicas and no need to dance through hoops. Those who swear by them usually do so for the following reasons; build quality, ergonomics and lenses that perform well when shot wide open. As Michael implied above, his 70 year young IIIa performs just as it did when it left the factory. As with anything else built by humans, occasionally someone will get a lemon, but on the whole, their quality is hard to beat. A camera is a tool, and well made tools are a joy to use. The preceding is my personal opinion. TIFWIW.

[ronald_moravec1]

It is a classic and it works. To those who are educated, the pictures are different than others.

 

You will not see it from the drugstore, but if you are a competent darkroom worker, they are images difficult or impossible to make with other brands. I tried to do make what I consider excellent prints with Pentax equipment. I tried thousands of pictures and just could not make them "work." They looked ok, but did not please me.

 

One day a neighbor loaned me an M3 and some lenses. Well it worked, same film, same developer, but now the pictures matched what I could see in the sample books at the camera store. A single roll of plus X was all it took.

 

Within months 4 Pentax bodies and 15/20 lenses were sold off to somebody else.

 

zeiss lenses are also are close second, but I must admit to not using the very latest CV made Zeiss. I have used a Rollie 35, Hasselblad, Schneider, Rodenstock large format. Thay are all ok, but not Leica.

 

One evening at a camera club, a man came to give a program. His Kodak projector failed and he projected thru the club`s Leica machine. In the end he remarked he did not know his slides looked that good.

 

One very famous photog is quoted as saying it is the only camera with a soul. A neighbor defines it as the only camera, the rest being something else.

 

So try one, enlarge some negs with a good lens and see what you get.

[john_boyle3]

To paraphrase Stuart, Leicas are very well built, they are a pleasure to use and they take excellent pictures. My 40 year old M4 and 50 year old M2 have been with me with on cross country skiing trips and week-long hikes in the Canadian Rockies and have never let me down. They also take all of the new Leica-mount lenses, although I'm quite happy with my older ones. In the words of an ad for Alexander Keiths India Pale Ale (from Nova Scotia) "Those who like it like it a lot."

[35mmdelux]

try shooting with a new MP for a week.

[Brad_]

>>>> This may sound terribly naive, ... why should I be dancing through hoops for Leica?

 

Not naive, good questions... So what really drives you more? Ownership of a pedigreed

brand and its history, or making great images? Do you already have a large portfolio of

images and are looking to fine-tune your capture experience, or are you just starting out.

Answering those will help shed light on your questions.

[summitar]

we are living in an age of hype, mega hype and ultra hype, where with enough smoke and mirrors, even a poorly trained chimp can pose as a president. It is reassuring to know there is a product that truly delivers the quality and reliability for which it is famous.

[asher]

<i>"why should I be dancing through hoops for Leica"</i><p>

 

You shouldn't. You don't need to. I don't. I just love using the camera to make

photographs.<p>

 

It's a personal preference thing. I suggest that you either try one and decide for yourself or

forget about it and move on.

[wai_leong_lee]

"why should I be dancing through hoops for Leica"

 

Same as a great pianist would use a Steinway or a violinist a Stradivarius. When you are a good enough photographer, you'll understand why.

[ron_breeze2]

My 1930 Leica 1 still works perfectly. Nuff said.

[ksargent]

There's nothing really wrong with wanting own a pedigreed brand with a history - if that's

important to you. I would be surprised if most Leica owners these days didn't have an

appreciation for the history behind the marque - unlike a photgrapher like Robert Frank

who, when asked, couldn't remember the model number of the camera he used in the

50's.

 

I would say, however, that people in love with their Leicas are probably more taken with

the feel than the history. I've owned a bunch of cameras - Nikons, Canons, Pentaxes - all

fine cameras, but none really had the feel of a mechanical Leica. Just like I've owned a lot

of guitars - Martins, Guilds, Larrivees - none of which have the feel of the Collings I play

now. Since becoming a Leica owner, I've been taken with the emotions that users of other

brands seem to have regarding Leicas - easily as strong and in some cases irrational as

those of Leica owners. I don't think it especially matters what brand of camera one uses -

but I do think there is something to the relationship a user has with his or her equipment.

For me, rangefinders are easier to focus and I like the looks of images made with vintage

lenses. Probably because my favorite photographers were active at the time those vintage

lenses were current. To return to the guitar analogy - it's the same thing with tube amps

and pre-war Martins: they may not be as accurate as modern designs, but they have a

personality that many people like and are willing to pay for. I guess what I'm getting at is

that a vintage Leica (or whatever brand is your favorite) is kind of like a tube amp. It's

hissy, finicky, hard to use - but the output is worth the trouble, if that's what you like.

[todd frederick]

It's nothing more than nostalga. (*v*)

[ksargent]

<i>It's nothing more than nostalga.</i>

 

Todd, no more so than painting with oils or writing with a fountain pen or driving a stickshift.

[Brad_]

>>> There's nothing really wrong with wanting own a pedigreed brand with a history

 

Did somebody say there was something wrong with that???

[ksargent]

>>>Did somebody say there was something wrong with that???

 

nope. I certainly didn't infer any negative connoation from your comment - I merely picked

up on your wording.

[jtdnyc]

<I understand the history, but as far as the user experience and the film development, why should I be dancing through hoops for Leica?>

 

You say you understand the history. So, I will say nothing about that.

 

You ask about the film development. Some people claim to see a difference in negatives made with a Leica under certain condtions; others can't see the difference and therefore deny it exists. A lot has been said in other recent threads about that. Objectively, if you want corner-to-corner resolution at wide apertures, Leica lenses excel. Subjectively, I find that Leica negatives, if properly exposed when created, tend to "fall on the paper" when enlarged. I'll leave the "post-processing" to people who enjoy that kind of stuff.

 

What remains is, as you put it, the "user experience." On this point there is much to say, but it is all subjective. The suggestion that you get hold of an MP -- or, for that matter, any Leica -- and shoot for a week is a good one.

 

For me, the user experience includes simplicity of operation, ease of focusing, quiet operation, dependability and handholdability at slow shutter speeds, among other factors. I simply enjoy shooting with a Leica, the way some people enjoy shooting with a certain type of gun or driving a certain type of car.

 

Beyond that, I appreciate the Leica on an aesthetic level. I am perplexed when people who have some legitimate claim as photographic artists turn into Philistines when it comes to appreciation of fine mechanical devices.

 

A camera may be a tool, but to a person with a certain aesthetic sensibility, it can be appreciated on other levels as well and using it to take pictures can be a true pleasure.

[Gus Lazzari]

For many Leica products:

 

Choice of materials, feel, fit, finish; the rarefied air of spare no expense craftsmanship...

[wai_leong_lee]

I should have said:

 

Same as a great pianist would use a Steinway or a violinist a Stradivarius. When you are a good enough photographer, you'll be able to make your Leica sing, too.

[travis1]

You can take some extremely terrible pictures with the Leica too. Your call.

[markwilkins]

<i>You will not see it from the drugstore, but if you are a competent darkroom worker, they are images difficult or impossible to make with other brands.</i><P>

 

I disagree, the main real differences are pretty evident with machine printing: nice rendering of out of focus areas, high contrast in the in-focus areas, and lack of serious optical aberrations shot wide open.<P>

 

-- Mark<P>

[hxt]

Because they are really, really neat!! And once you have one, you can act all pretentious and

elite and stuff!!!! A camera is not just a box with a lens on it!!! Plus your I.Q. will shoot

through the roof, apparently. All jest aside, Of my many, many cameras, I ALWAYS have one

of the M series with me, no matter what, and all of my other cameras sit gathering dust, or

are with friends... someone's gotta shoot with them!!

[josef_cadek]

I would like to contribute with my little opinion. I do not buy all that about status, showing off, Patek Phillipe or Rolls-Royce analogy.

 

I appreciate Leica is discreet and does not catch too much attention.

Leica does all I want, way I want...always, perfectly, precisely.

No need for different camera.

 

I agree with all what has been said about mechanical perfection, more than lifetime longevity, optical perfection, incredible reliability.

 

Get one, use it. You will find the answer for yourself.

Leica could be affordable.

 

I am 26 and I have IIIa and 6 lenses and Visoflex and viewfinders, hoods and bunch of filters etc., most of it from eBay, all in perfect condition. My youngest item among my Leica stuff is from 1956.

 

But the most important is:

LEICA IS FUN TO USE !!!

 

And it is small and light

(usually...not with viso+telyt20) :)

[margaret_kaufold]

I am not being as current as you may need but I had an impulse wanto give some personal experiences I have had using leicas over the years.

 

When I was 24 ( I'm 56) I ventured out to purchase my first camera... I was thinking of a Konica it was fast and small... I had no clue...

I realized I could not shoot closeups with the automatic Konica and was introduced to SLR...

I was shown various cameras and told that I should start out with a Practica. The shop I had gone to was very dusty and the owner was somewhat of an absent minded professor. You had to be careful not to trip over the tripods and whatnot. I requested to look at the camera on a shelf behind dusty glass ..I had no clue what it was but I loved it! This camera a Leica just focused without matching up some focusing gizmo the others had. it was bright and clear. I was told however, I did not need that camera and I went home depressed.. my boyfreind was no help ...

My father was around and I told him what happened ... so he went down to the shop and told the guy I wanted the Leica ...And he explained to me in the meantime ... that a Leica lens never wears out. The Practica lens would and in the meantime I would be fooled thinking that my eye was getting better as opposed to the camera lens was wearing out. And where would that get me?

As well, I could pass the camera on to my grandchildren and they would still have top quality and value.

I loved my camera .. I had a few stolen ...got more and went on to freelance with them. I found that was using several cameras to cover the various films I needed on the road ... . I found if iI used fujji I could beat deary weather it was so tropical...My Leica was absolutely superb, I could shoot in harsh 12:00 noon lighting and avoid contrasty shadows. The Leica was the only camera out of the three (Nikon and Contax) that would go right into the shadows and capture the tones. It compensated for the harsh shadows that were horrible and filled in with the other lenses. I had to shoot all times of the day. ... and I was hard on them, I got sand them,

I wasn't afraid to used them and abuse them they could take it.

 

As well, a friend of mind bought one in the eighties ... she .

Shed bought it for $1500 with two lenes (a special deal) the replacment value was $8000 10 years later.

So ... some personal history as to WHY Leica has earned it's reputaton.