Living as a Leica minimalist

[mark cortella]

<p>A Leica M9,and a 35mm F2 Summicron,and a 75mm F2 Summicron,apoasph version. The 90 is to long for good portaits,at least to me.</p>

[hankh]

Before I sold my Leica system, on a three month trip to Italy I brought a M7 with a 15mm Voitlander, Leica 24mm f2.8

,Leica 35mm f2 ,50mmf2 and 90mmf2 with 50 rolls of Fuji Velvia. The aprox. percentage I used each lens in the above

order was: 15mm 3%, 24mm 25%, 35mm 60%, 50mm 10% and 90mm 2%. As you can see 24 & 35 were my bread and

butter lenses. Why are they gone, film too expensive. Wanted full frame format and they were sold before M9 came out,

With a Nikon D700 and Leica Dlux4 now.

[Karim Ghantous]

 

<blockquote>

<p>I'm down to a pre-ASPH 35/2 and a 50/2 Summicron for my M4-P and M6.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I note that some photographers like 35+50, while some prefer 28+50. 28+50 sounds more logical - however, what are your reasons for your choice? I admit I like the 35, though.</p>

 

[aplumpton]

<p>Personally, I like the differences in focal length to be more substantial than 35-50. Perhaps that is because I don't usually remain very static in one place when photographing; I approach or withdraw from a subject (and adopt different angles of direction) to change the framing. A 28-50 or a 35-90 (or 35-75, or 21-35) is more practical for that.</p>

[mark_l6]

<p>Currently using an M6 with 28/1.9 ultron and 50/2 summicron latest. The 28mm lives on the body nearly fulltime, I like the way it uses the largest frame in the finder, use the 50 for details and portraits, but it does not get used very often. Both seem to have a nice creamy look and lots of detail without the harshness some sharp leica lenses have. Both put the focus exactly where I expect it to be.<br>

Lenses I got rid of;<br>

21mm color skopar-great lens, very small, did not like seperate finder, did not use it enough, sold it. Had a screw mount 21mm skopar first but it was wildly decentered leaving one corner incredibly soft, the dealer happily swapped it for the M mount version which was very sharp all over and handled much better.<br>

35/2 summicron aspheric-absolutely loathed it, could not sell it fast enough, very sharp but even managed to make tri-x look digital, really, really harsh, worst out of focus backgrounds I've ever seen. In 35 years of photography the only lens I would say I hated, I'm totally allergic to this version of the summicron, funny how most others love it, glad we're all different!<br>

35/1.4 nokton single coated-nice look to the image, wild bokeh like a petzval which I loved, massive front-focus problem, huge barrel distortion, sold it. Strange thing is for environmental portraits it produced almost all of my favourites over the last few years, but I could not reliably focus the bloody thing at wide apertures so it had to go.<br>

Never tried a lens over 50mm with the Leica, just can't imagine using a silly little square in the middle of the finder, that;'s what my Nikon F is for, with 85 and 180, don't use them very often either.<br>

The less lenses I carry, the more photos I take, really!</p>

[don_essedi]

My photography has always been handheld, casual, candid. Because of a 'condition' in my hands, aggravated by injury, I cannot comfortably hold most modern cameras. I don't stray often from a 50mm lens. Pentax SPII worked well for me for a long time, but a few years ago I bought a IIIf and Elmar 3.5 and it was like hand-in-glove. So, these days, its a Leica III and a collapsible 50. Fits in the pocket of my jeans. Perfect fit for my hands. The several inconveniences of the design hardly matter compared to the big advantage of actually being able to hold and use it.

[Robin Smith]

<p>My favorite minimalist kit was the Leica R6.2 with 35 cron and 80 mm 'lux. For Ms it would be 28mm 'cron and 50 'cron. However, if I had only one lens and camera it would always be the 50 cron (M or R). I do agree that there is always a tension between bringing enough lenses and having too many. Too many and you are presented with too many choices and the kit is heavy and cumbersome; too few and you lose too many photo ops. I have always loved a 2 lens kit though I must say. My early Leica days when I had only a 50mm and 90mm I look back on with nostalgia.</p>

[wenhan_xue]

<p>My mini-package is M6 TTL 0.58 and 35mm Summilux pre-asph. For me, it's good enough for street, landscape and architecture.</p>

[ray_dicecca]

<p>My favorite Leica set-up:</p>

<p>Leica M6 Classic : 35 Summicron w/hood (4th version) : Leica half-case</p>

<p>Everything falls so naturally that the camera basically disappears in my hands. Just love the ergonomics of this package - especially the tabbed 'cron where I just use my left index finger to focus and adjust aperture.</p>

<p>Close 2nd:<br /> M2 : 35 Summaron-M 2:8</p>

[jason]

<p>My kit for travel,photojournalism, weddings and portraits is a Leica-M3, MC-meter and the collapsible 50mm Summicron. The lens has a soft look at maximum aperture,the contrast low. My color negative film are scanned at development. Hi-Rez scans. Contrast easily raised. No highlights burned away a-la digital.I also use digital these days with,in a small point and shoot digital. Anything that fits into a pocket. Occasionally I drag along along lens,usually the 135mm Tele-Elmar f4.0 and if I don't need the sharpness and clarity, an ancient 135mm Hektor f4.5. A somewhat soft lens with occasional glimpses of sharpness! The Hektor weighs almost nothing.<br>

My kit so small fits under a jacket, parka-coat or simply round my neck.The Leica was the tool that taught me to travel light, abandoning a filled gadget bag,with a shop load of lenses,bodies and flash. I did need that though for some assignments! My usual film is Fuji or Kodak Max in 24exp roll. One roll mostly!</p>

[doug_nelson3]

<p>My Leica minimal kit is the 35 Summicron R (55 filter) and a Leicaflex SL. The CL and lenses went because the body was just too fragile and unreliable. My Leicaflex is worth so little that I may as well keep it. I use the 35 'cron on a Canon 5D2 with an adapter, also. On a recent vacation, the 35 did 85% of my digital shots.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p><strong>Doug:</strong> Maybe the Leicaflex does not command a great price but you have one of the finest and most rugged of cameras. I had heard about Leica R lenses on the Canon 5D and that it was a very fine combination, better than some Canon lenses.</p>

<p><strong>Don, Robin, Wenham, Ray, Jason </strong>(and others who have kindly contributed to date)<strong>:</strong> It is good to see that one camera body and one lens are so popular. It is sometimes better to have a minimalist kit always available as opportunities to capture amazing subject matter can happen anytime. Also, whatever the lens focal length chosen for an outing, it places a useful temporary constraint on the way we see and what we see, which is often better than fumbling to find another lens rather than thinking about content and composition. I agree with Don that the little IIIf is a great tool, although rather than a 50mm lens I usually go out with it and either a 28 or compact 35mm lens and a V-C viewfinder, and rely on scale focussing, hyperocal distance, or infinity setting, and thus forgo the independent RF focussing finder unless absolute sharpness on the subject is critical. </p>

[35mmdelux]

<p>After much ado, two 35mm-M lenses: the f/2.0 [V4] and f/1.4 [pre-asph].</p>

[dg1]

<p>My current minimalist kit is the Sigma DP2. It's quickly becoming the only thing I'm using. Love the Foveon sensor and the 41mm f/2.8 lens is superb. Going with the simplicity of one-camera/one-lense has brought a lot of joy to my experience of the photographic process. Not a Leica, but works well for me as a kind of digital CL. I use it as a manual camera and find it very enjoyable to use this way. Just my two cents, sorry if comment is too non-Leica. As far as that goes, given quite a bit more spare change, I'd love also to be using the X1 in this way. </p>