Guardian.co.uk photo blog about Leica M-E

[MTC Photography]

<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/photography-blog/2012/dec/28/leica-m-e-rangefinder-photography">http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/photography-blog/2012/dec/28/leica-m-e-rangefinder-photography</a></p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Thanks for posting the review. Lower price aside, I get the feeling she is as much in love with rangefinder photography as anything else, and also a too briefly explained (justified) IQ of the output. She noted the shortcomings of the monitor resolution and slow buffer. On the other hand, nice to see a professional journal photographer who still sees the virtues of the rangefinder camera.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>The article reminds me when I bought my first leica...she's so sweet:) </p>

[john_boyle3]

<p>Martin, thanks for the post. It was interesting to note that the one lens she bought was the 50mm 1.4 Asph., rather than a 35mm. All in all, a fine, well-written article.</p>

[philip_wilson]

Great article. It captured why I love shooting my Leica and look to do so whenever possible. I do not have the same

feelings about my Canon DSLRs

[Robin Smith]

<p>Nice to be young and to have a Leica! I agree with what she says.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>I really liked Sarah Lee's article and photographs. I finally learned the difference between an M9 and an M-E.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Her article reminds me of when I was very young, worked occasionally for a small new and used camera store, and was able to afford a Nikon rangefinder with a 50mm f1.4 Nikkor. Just about everything in my life was prey to its lens and I now spend value time today trying to renew that great pleasure. </p>

[ian_campbell1]

<p>I had a little pile of scruffy 2fs back in the '80s, 40 quid each at the used camera shops: not many people cared. Now, old Olympus XAs and a tiny Fuji digital, and that's about the only thing I use in towns...</p>

<p> </p>

[jason]

<p>i use Leica M film cameras.I've used the digital version and truthfully it doesn't feel or sound like a Leica mechanical. It's handy, it's fast and probably better for newspaper work. There speed is the essence. The feel of a Leica digital or a low end DSLR, Nikon 3100 or Canon T3/4/Kiss is huge! The truth though those DSLR are not much bigger, have way more useful features, SENSOR cleaning, large assortment of Affordable lenses.They are quieter! High ISO for available light. Remember SLR/DSLR is to "see" what you will get. Way better than those frame-lines, now so inaccurate, compared to my M3.<br>

The Leica will within 3 maybe 4 years be dis-continued. Right now Leica has "difficulties" in having spares for replacement, not only on recent digital models, but on the M's and R's as well. A huge repair bill one way to end servicing..<br>

I think it is<strong> a step forward</strong> but the <strong>DSLR are running Marathons.</strong> I would NOT buy a digital M. Even by economizing, selling gear, the M-E ( so close to the Pentax ME..) would never see a new Leica lens unless i won the lottery. Even if i did, there are better ways to spend money. Travel.<br>

Personally a journalist needs a short wide angle(35mm or 28mm), perhaps the 50mm and a short tele. Long teles may work but to date nobody has said much.. Using the EVIL finder a way. The Visoflex i got rid of in the 60's as it offered none of the virtues of a SLR. I was using a Pentax Spotmatic. Yes, it is still working and taking photos. It has never had a service. My Leicas ,have lost count, in being serviced.<br>

I no longer do PJ work, being retired. Use of an i-Phone would be much better.Add a point and shoot system and a small DSLR kit, a few lenses, would cover any possibilities. Her rig covers a very small area. Lucky her, if that is acceptable.<br>

I like my Leica system, but as a one time pro, quickly saw how i could make money, not spend it!</p>

[james_elwing]

<p>I see no cause for negativity. I went from M3 to M9 seamlessly. I did have a rogue pixel problem and focusing RF issue under warranty, and have since learned it is expensive to drop on PVC/ concrete tiles.<br>

2M3's and a Spotmatic have been sitting with film in them for maybe 2 years, plus another Spotmatic, they are all in perfect working order.<br>

The Spotmatics, which, among other things, did the lion's share of my technical documentation, have been replaced with a marvellous Canon DSLR with a 50mm macro and a few fairly ordinary zooms. If I drop it and it doesn't bounce, it owes me nothing after 5 years.<br>

The M9 is back in service with an old copying stage & Summicron lens head, and projected light focusing, because it does a better job copying fairly high res.. Otherwise, it travels with me everywhere. Visoflex 3 is clunky, and I can use old longer lenses, but I mostly don't as my 65 year old shoulders need repair, but I am out of warranty.<br>

Warranty work by Leica, however, was carried out rapidly, and RF readjustment while not cheap, was faultless.<br>

I just can't see them going out of business just now.</p>

<p> </p>

[aplumpton]

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>I just can't see them going out of business just now.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p> I read recently that Leica doubled its profits last year. I doubt very much it is anywhere near going out of business.</p>

 

 

 

[stric]

<p>Response to Jason Gold:<br>

Jason I like your response. Finally someone had decency to finally be critical about this - a bit pathetic - article in Guardian and what it promotes. Even though I read Guardian daily I think this article was a let down. I like my MP but I'm still not into Leica's digital M line; for some reason it feels like something is seriously amiss. </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Emir and Jason, I wonder why it is so necessary to mount a tirade against Leica digital Ms when it is evident that some people just like using RF cameras rather than SLR or TLR types. Jason's remarks about size or feel can equally be placed against the Mamiya 6, 7, the Bessa 67 or the Fujifilm 670 and 690s. These are relatively clunky instruments and large, but most using them could not care a bean. Yes, Leicas are expensive and perhaps too expensive, but so are German and Japanese (and Italian!) higher end cars. Some are willing to pay more and accept less in some areas for some other advantage (Leica optics, long lasting systems, etc.). Leica doubled its revenues last year, so I doubt we will see them going down the hole very soon.</p>

<p>Although I don't like the high cost of Leicas, it is good news when younger persons, especially professionals, see something in the Leica that does something for them, notwithstanding the usual disclaimers.</p>