Nikon FM2n vs Leica MP for Travel

[Robin Smith]

As an aside, I don't make a distinction between "photography" and "travel photography". I prefer to always have my kit with me whether I am traveling or not. I don't take specialist wildlife or bird photography, so what I use when traveling is essentially the same as when i go out at home to take photos. Obviously some lenses I will leave behind when I know they will not be used, but in general I like to have one system that I mix and match. To me, having more than one system just makes picking the items to take with you at any one time provides a complication I don't need. In the past when I had paying jobs I had 3 systems on the go, but I feel I have learnt from that experience that I don't like it, and it ties up capital that could be better used elsewhere.

[glen_h]

As an aside, I don't make a distinction between "photography" and "travel photography". I prefer to always have my kit with me whether I am traveling or not.

 

(snip)

 

Some years ago, I started dividing up my slides into what I called travel and family.

 

Reminds me that not so long after I started photography our family was visiting a popular

tourist attraction. Another family was entering at about the same time, and the mom warned

the kids not to take any picture that didn't have a family member in it.

 

I like pictures of scenery, such as lakes and mountains, that (mostly) don't have

people in them. Pictures of family members can have scenic backgrounds, though.

 

But otherwise, for travel that might involve a lot of walking, lighter cameras are nice.

 

Often enough, I have one film and one digital camera, so the weight can add up fast.

[melvinchong]

Why not go Contax and have yourself some great juicy Carl Zeiss lenses ? They're relatively much more affordable as compared to Leica.

[eb_kidd]

I use several FM2n camera bodies. I use both Nikkor ais and Zeiss lenses for Nikon. If weigh is a major concern I use the Nikkor ais lenses. If maximum image quality is the goal I use the Zeiss lenses. I have a Zeiss Milvus 50mm f1.4 that is my most used lens. One of the advantages of this approach is you could try it without starting a whole new system. I admit that I often have Leica fantasies but so far haven't taken the plunge.

 

One other advantage of the FM2n is that in many cities there's at least one pro camera house that can perform emergency repairs/CLAs, loan you an extra body, and even a different lens should you desire it for some special occasion (i.e. a PC or tilt-shift lens if you decided you want to take rectilinear pics of tall buildings). Here in the American southwest, there are convenient shops in the SF Bay Area, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Las Vegas and Phoenix to cover my bases. Leica service exists but is going to be less convenient, and there aren't the opportunities to rent lenses either.

 

(DISCLAIMER - I have never owned a Leitz product but have owned 5 Nikon SLRs - 2 of them FM2n which were my "go-to" camera bodies in my freelance/stringer photojournalism days - 2 Nikon DSLRs and plenty of Nikkor and some of the better independent Nikon mount lenses as well.)

[eb_kidd]

(misfire, sorry - MODS: please delete)

[eb_kidd]

BTW, if you end up with some spare change after your Leica purchase, consider getting a Nikkor AIS 35mm f/1.4 for your Nikon FM2. Several posters here recommended it highly a couple years ago in a thread about 35mm Nikon-mount lenses. I resisted it for decades, having been happy enough with the small old-school 35/2 Nikkor-O. But that thread finally convinced me to try one, and I was hooked almost immediately. Its a somewhat variable lens depending on distance and aperture, but when it delivers, it REALLY delivers. And, its the smallest SLR 35mm f/1.4 ever made, with Nikon's standard 52mm filter size.

 

Being a bit of a cheapskate myself, I hesitate to upgrade a lens of a given focal length if I'm already happy with what I have. 30+ years ago back in my US Air Force days, I forked out the yen equivalent of $130 USD at the time and picked up a used, clean AI 35mm F2.0 from Nikon House on the Ginza in Tokyo, just a few blocks from the JR Yurakucho station and some of the best street food in the civilized world (Sushi Alley and Yakitori Alley adjacent to the JR viaduct between Yurakucho and Shimbashi). The thing balanced so well on my FM2n that I could literally shoot as slow as 1/8 second without any noticeable camera shake, at least when magnified to 8x10 size prints. The lens performed reasonably well with only moderate flare wide open provided I didn't point it at any excessive bright light sources. That was my "go to" lens for not only street/night photography but for my weekend beat stringer work for the San Diego Tribune in my post-AF days. I still use it to these days with a Nikon Y48 (yellow) filter semi-permanently attached to in for my B&W work. I say "semi-permanently" because a combination of stiction between the filter and lens threads (it has been banged around more than once on a few hiking/climbing trips) and some issue with the front barrel has the front of the lens working loose when I try to remove the filter! The lens and the glass at this point have enough wear with a third century of hard use that it is probably not economical to repair, but it seems to do fine in its present use that I will just leave the yellow filter stuck on it, keep it for B&W work, and pick up a similar lens for digital & the rare occasion I want to shoot an roll of Fuji Velvia, which IMHO is the best E-6 film ever made for my particular shooting style.

Edited January 2, 2020 by eb_kidd

[eb_kidd]

Reminds me that not so long after I started photography our family was visiting a popular

tourist attraction. Another family was entering at about the same time, and the mom warned

the kids not to take any picture that didn't have a family member in it.

 

Their mom would have hated me, > 99% my pics have no people in them. My mom was a bit more realistic, it was "you can take pics of anything you want, but you have to pay for it yourself".

[john_tran14]

If for any reason I had a Leica MP, I would sell it right away. I had only a Leica III (which I bought from Goodwill at about $20) and I sold it for $300, because it was hard for me to put the film roll in. I believe the lens that came with that camera was not bad, but (for me) there would be a lot more fun to use an SLR and the final result would not be worse in anyway.

[eb_kidd]

Also note, we're in 2019 now: if you think people on the street don't know what a Leica is, think again. Doltish hipsters in every city of the world have now made sure nearly everyone knows a Leica is an expensive piece of jewelry, and if someone is pointing a Leica at you odds are they have money.

 

I have to laugh a bit, given that I lived in Los Angeles in the 1980's and back then you could clearly tell the difference between Leica "users" and Leica "wearers" as the "users" typically had the Leica name & logo either blacked out with paint or covered with electrical tape. Given that I was far more interested in urban/industrial and photojournalism and often frequented the less law-abiding parts of town, I figgered that even if I had the funds, wearing anything with the word LEICA on me was simply another way of saying "rob me"...

[eb_kidd]

If for any reason I had a Leica MP, I would sell it right away. I had only a Leica III (which I bought from Goodwill at about $20) and I sold it for $300, because it was hard for me to put the film roll in. I believe the lens that came with that camera was not bad, but (for me) there would be a lot more fun to use an SLR and the final result would not be worse in anyway.[ATTACH=full]1323621[/ATTACH]

 

I have had some pretty good luck in Southern California thrift shops over the years. I picked up a nice old Canon IV-SB rangefinder in West LA for $20 in the 1980's and turned around and sold it for $100 to a friend whose relatives willed him a Leica screwmount RF (don't recall which model). One interesting find was a bag labeled "Instamatic Camera with 3 lenses" for $10 which turned out to be a Kodamatic Instamatic Reflex, a 126 film SLR with 3 Retina-compatible Schneider-Kreuznach lenses - did nicely when I turned that one around as well. My latest good find was not so spectacular but worked out well - a Nikon N65 with no lens for $7 at a Goodwill in Chandler AZ (suburb of Phoenix). The batteries ($12) cost more than a camera, but the thing fired up when I cleaned the contacts up and put the batteries. Not the highest end camera by for but I can't complain about having a working Nikon SLR backup body for less than $20.