Is Leica the answer?

[rasupp]

I had an M4-P. I sold it and used the proceeds to purchase a Bessa R2 and a Minolta Scan Dual III film scanner. I'm a major fan of Leitz glass but I'm one of those heretics that feels a camera body is a device for separating film from lens. And at 1/5 the price of a new Leica body, I'm much, much less worried about what happens to my R2 vs the loss of a M.

 

After using the R2 for a while I'm very happy with my decision. The R2 is Good Enough. I'm also the proud owner of a Bessa L. 85 bucks out the door from Steve Gandy; it's worthwhile just on the concept of a $75 metered LTM camera.

[jay_.]

<<I'm currently using Canon EOS 3, with 28-70L and 35-350L and I love them. But a lot of times I wish I can have a camera that is discreet and non-intimidating. A camera that doesnt attract unnecessary attention, and small enough to be carry around.>>

 

Get the Rebel 2000 and 28/2.8 or 35/2 EF lens. Total will cost you (mint, second hand) around $300-350. You'll get the benefit of a backup camera and lens compatible with your existing system.

[steve_chan5]

Maybe its not an option, but we've been looking at some of the digital cameras out there, and the powershot S50 is about as small and quiet as you could hope for, and it is much cheaper than $1400.

 

That being said, I was in the same situation a few months back, and wanted something smaller than my Nikon kit, but still film - I got turned onto rangefinders after a conversation about Leicas and poking around on Stephen Gandy's CameraQuest site. I'll babble on for a little bit about my experiences, maybe you'll find it handy, or maybe you'll find it very boring...

 

I think you should spend as little money up front as possible to try out the waters, before plunging into rangefinders. I'd buy used, because then if you decide you don't like it, you won't be out too much when you resell it.

 

I put together a used Hexar RF kit with the body, the Hexanon 50/2, a Canon 100/3.5 and a VC 25/4. The total cost was just under $1000. I bought it because my Nikon SLR kit was too big to carry around. I'm quite happy with the kit, and amd pretty sure that I can sell it for very close to what I paid for it.

 

It has the convenience of AE, automatic film advance and high quality construction (at least as good as a Contax G-series). So far, it is just about perfect, except that I want a more compact normal lens: if I came across a Summicron-C (or clone) at a reasonable price, I'd snatch it up.

 

If you are pretty good at judging exposure, you can get some really nice deals on older rangefinders that are well made and very quiet. The Contax IIa is nicely made and fairly unobtrusive camera. If you you don't mind something a little bigger and willing to invest some extra effort, you might look into some of the early Russian Kiev 2/2A cameras and having them thoroughly cleaned and adjusted by inexpensive Russian repairmen. At going rates on auction sites and with reputable Russian repairmen, you should be able to get a buttery smooth Contax II clone with a good 50/2 Sonnar clone for under $200.

 

Moving up in price, you can look at the various Canon rangefinders like the Canon P. They can be had for $250 (I know someone who will sell you one for that price) and with modern Voigtlander lenses, they're compact, much quieter than an SLR and take pictures at least as good as an SLR prime lens.

 

If you want lots of automation, I'd suggest you take up that offer of $275 for the G1. I had a G1, and it is a handy little camera. The particular one I had seemed to have some issues with the focus lock, but the focusing was accurate, the Contax AF lenses sharp and with high saturation and very convenient - even on grey, overcast days, colors were still vivid.

 

It wasn't very good as an all manual camera though: the lens only had clicks at full f-stops, and the shutter was capable of a much finer speed gradations than you were able to set by the wheel, and the manual focus doesn't "feel" manual. You can think of it as a P&S with awesome, interchangeable lenses, or as a small version of the modern auto-everything SLR's. The autofocus action does click a a bit, and the film advance does buzz. So it isn't going to be as silent as an M7, but it is still more discreet than an AF SLR. But the Contax is a kind of shiny, attractive camera, so it may attract attention to itself.

 

The Voigtlander cameras are affordable and the R2 especially is a viable low end alternative to the Leicas, but I find the shutter noise quite sharp (more noticeable than the D100, less noticeable than an N90s) - so it fails on the unobtrusive part.

 

If you don't feel a need for interchangeable lenses, then I think the advice on the Contax T3 is good. Other cameras commonly suggested are the Olympus Stylus Epic and Yashica T4. A bigger camera that is super-stealthy would be the Hexar AF. The lens is supposed to be the equal of the pre-asph Summicron 35/2, and the camera is supposed to be virtually silent. They're kind of big though (same size as my Hexar RF).

 

Steve

[jheimsch]

I know this is the Leica forum, but how about a Nikon FE, FE2, or FM3a and a 50mm f1.8, 45mm f2.8 or nicely used 35mm f1.4. Optics in the same range as many mentioned above, without the 4 digit price. Anyone of the above mentioned Nikon cameras are not as stylish as a Leica, but still give you the small, unobtrusive, light tight box factor as the M7, etc with a good meter and apeture priority to boot. Learn to see the picture and save up for the dream M6, M7, MP, etc for after your graduate when $1,400 isn't 10% of your income for the year.

[Allen Herbert]

Steve, nice photos. Me,i save for what i really want.Leica, has the reputation. Why?. There's always second best. Take your choice, plenty on offer. The photos' are what really matter; the tool is play talk.

[tcb.photo]

Hi Jeff

Your obviously getting some great answers to your question. But you are use to the quality of the Canon L seris lens, and EOS3, I used those for many years, with a Eos 1n and 1v, and I can tell you one thing. The idea of a Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa R or R2 isn't going to make you happy. I own a couple of Voigltander lens. I sold one, and kept the 50mm f/1.5. A very very sharp lens. But the Bodies have been "know" to be riddled with view finder problems. Not all of them but enought to show that the Quality Control at Cosina needs some attention. Especially when concerned with their bodies. You pay a fair price for a M6, and use it for a few year, then you can sell it or move up to a newer model, and not lose any money. Even M4-p are selling on ebay for $600-700.00. Why, quality. Consistant Quality. Plus they take a beating. My Leica M6 was bought by me, when I graduated from scool, in 1984 new. I've had it cleaned 2 times and it works like new. If i wanted to sell it, I could still get around $900-1000 for it.

 

The Summicron is legendary, and captures a "feel" to a photo that no other lens can ever capture. I've owned and used the Canon EF 50mm 1.0, no comparison. the Voigtlander Norkton is a fine lens, but can't capture that feeling.

Just an opinion

Good luck

 

Rob<div></div>

[rasupp]

>> But the Bodies have been "know" to be riddled with view finder problems. Not all of them but enought to show that the Quality Control at Cosina needs some attention.

 

Well, Rob. I did a google search for evidence of bessa rangefinders being "riddled with problems." Didn't see anything. Perhaps you can shed some light on what's known about bessa rangefinder problems.

 

I'm a _very_ happy R2 user who got their by way of a M4-P.

[gerry_szarek]

For the money, a Hexar RF, followed by a used 50 Summicron, if pictures are not sharp wide open send to RF and 50 to NJ (Konica) and get them aligned. The Hexar RF is noiser than my M4-P. The HRF has a built in motor, easier loading, built in meter, all the frames a M7 has, and slightly different form factor.

 

So Jeff my recommendation is post where you are currently living, beg and plead with this group to find someone to take you out and show you around with a Leica setup.

 

Yes the answer is YES and not 42. BTW I bought my M4-P when I was in grad school, had to stop drinking beer for 6 months.

 

Happy snaps.

[jeff_m1]

Morning Guys!

 

I woke up today, turn on the computer, and got 32 replies to my question. Wow.. THANKS A LOT guys, the answers are very helpful to me.

 

I'm living in Sydney, Australia at the moment. I have just done my Research Dissertation on photography and narrativity. I researched about the photographs series of Cambodian Khmer Rouge victims on S-21 prison. From there I become more attracted to the world of black and white street-people photography. Therefore I'm thinking of a small camera that are not obstrusive. Small enough to be take everywhere, and good enough to produce the image with the versetaility of a changeable lens SLR.

 

Yes, I was worried whether it will be a huge change from the AF world of EOS to the manual rangefinder world. Rob's offer of the Contax G1 is very tempting to me. Especially for the money I can save rather than buying a Leica kit. I think it will be the best step to take for me to get the contax G1 and adapt my self to the new world of rangefinder camera.

 

I'm still very much interested in the M6 + 50mm lens, but I think it is wiser in my current situation to get the Contax G1 + 45mm lens on the fraction of the cost of M6.

 

Once again, thanks for all the help!

 

 

Jeff

[david_chananie]

I support the recommendation of an earlier poster that you try out photography with a rangefinder cheaply before launching into Leicaland. You're limited to a maximum of 135mm unless you use very specialized and slow equipment, you can't directly see depth of field, and you can get a limited field of view. So, you might wish to get a cheap camera first to see if the rangefinder approach is for you. I also wanted to get a camera which I could take to some problematic places and not break the bank if something happened to it.

 

I bought a Canonet QL17 on e*ay.com which uses autoexposure and has a 40mm f1.7 lens. I've been pleased with the quality of the pictures it produces. I read up on it before purchase on Steven Gandy's site. He also recommends other vintage models. The cost is less than $100 and worth the price. All best.

[andrew_lee2]

If you continue to be intrigued by the Leica M and feel that you may want to arrive there eventually, do yourself a favor and bypass the Contax (although it is a hell of a sweet deal); get a 1970s fixed-lens rangefinder instead, as others have suggested. The Canonet QL17 G-III (which I started out with) is an excellent option. I have both the M6 and the Contax, and I will tell you that aside from small(-ish) size (they are not THAT small) and excellent lenses, in operation the two share practically nothing in common. With the Canonet, you will learn about composing with and seeing outside of the framelines, and manually presetting focus using the DOF scale (you could manually focus the Contax, but it's awkward and impractical), two things that, in particular, I find to be hallmarks of rangefinder - and Leica M - photography.

[travis1]

To answer the original question. If you really want a small and discrete camera, get a Rollei Prego 30. It's so small I have problem locating it myself on my palm, let alone people noticing it.;)

 

and it's sharp! No shutter lag.

[harvey_edelstein]

After reading all these posts, I come up with another direction for you. Pentax just came up with the smallest 35mm AF slr camera ever. It is probably about as small as a Leica 4.8" x 3.3"x 2.5" and only weigh in at 11.8 oz. Its smaller and lighter than the OM3 was. It has the most AF cross sensors ever in a camera 11 and has a 16 segment meter that does spot,center weighted and other modes x sync at 125th sec. , has 2.5fps drive. Its called the Pentax *ist and the street price of the body only is about $350. I have the Leica M4p and after using an eos 3 I think the really small and light Pentax would be more to your liking. A lot of the intangables of the rangefinders are offset by the lack of creature comfort and electronic goodies you are used to.

[lee_shively]

Leica's are people cameras. Sure, they can be used for a lot of other stuff, but they really are a great choice for candids of people doing the things people do. The problem with most other 35mm cameras is that they have whirring motor drives and autofocus lenses and, sometimes, whizz-bang flashing lights. People notice them because techy things grab attention. I've tried to shoot candids with a Rebel 2000 and 35mm lens as someone suggested. Didn't work. I'd lift the camera to my eye and I would draw attention. It's even worse with a bigger EOS model and big L-series zoom. With a Leica, I've stood 10-20 feet away from people and shot multiple photos of them without so much as a glance. They don't notice the red dot or care about the old fashioned camera. Techy things are interesting but may also be threatening, I guess. The guy with the old camera is no threat at all.

 

If that's the type of photography you're interested in pursuing, a Leica would certainly rank high on the list of cameras to buy. While I am sure the Contax is an excellent camera, it may be too high tech to be very discreet--I don't know, I've never even touched one. Good luck.

[frank_bunnik]

I have made several shots of people, totally unnoticed from just a meter or 2/3 away with the G2. In Nepal for instance with nobody around but the 2 women I photographed while doing their hair in an open field and myself (I am 2 meters tall so I go by hardly unnoticed). So yes, it is perfectly possible to make pictures with a g2 from close distance without being noticed. I admit the women must have seen me but they did not pay attention. Small camera... probably nothing special.

[patricks]

If you want to see what a a fellow Australian can accomplish w/ a simple M6 + 50 cron set up, do visit

http://www.leica-gallery.net/heymanphoto/folder-list.html

 

I used to have a Contax G2 - I really like the high contrast output one gets from those lenses, but the AF is not the way to go IMO - you EOS 3 is much better w/ its focus confirmation and it doesn't park itself at infinity every time, also the G1 viewfinder isn't much fun for capturing the "decisive moment".

 

M4P and a minty cron is what fits w/ your budget, or why not a M3? Generally, a minty M6TTL runs you around $1,200 and it a best-in-show.

[cameron_sawyer]

So tell us, WHY are you thinking about Leica? There are different reasons, which result in different answers. If you are attracted to the lovely look and feel of a Leica, then only that will do. It's a fantastic toy! Buy a mint M6TTL; a great bargain these days, and a Voigtlander lens if you can't afford a Leica lens at the moment.

 

If you would like to spend less money and exercise less thought in shooting, and still get a nice quality feel and great images, then buy a Contax (the ultimate point & shoot).

 

However, if you like the idea of really manual, elemental rangefinder photography (one of the things Leica stands for), and you have ANY kind of budget constraints at all, then go for the Voigtlander system, which has a price-to-value ratio about 300% better than Leica. The Voigtlander bodies are much more functional and less pretty than Leica, but they are virtually equal in performance, and in some ways are superior (the finder). They are even more manual, having even manual frameline selection (Leica is automatic). The lenses are superb, slightly worse than current Leica lenses, but most are probably better than anything on any SLR. They cost 1/4 to 1/6 of Leica.

 

This is the perfect way to start Leica-type photography, if shooting is your primary aim, and you don't want autofocus and autoexposure.

[harvey_edelstein]

My point is that if a G2 with its winder and AF noise is not deterrant to street photography then an Slr that is even smaller and lighter would be even better. The g2 only weekness is its viewfinder which any good SLR can beat, for focusing and composition since regardless of lens you see what you get. Lets not forget that the Pentax *ist only weighs 11.8 ozs. and so its the perfect camera for travel with a couple of primes and a zoom and it has ttl flash which most of the rangefinders you can afford don't have. You don't have to worry about how to use polarizer since you can see and meter their effects and micro and macro photography is easy too. Besides you are used to all the bells and whistles since the EOS3 is a fabulous camera that is just too big to go without being noticed. Get what works well with what you know and like just get a smaller SLR.

[scott squire nonfiction]

Jeff,

While it's not a Leica and the experience isn't going to be the

same, Rob's Contax G1 is a great deal. Really good camera.

Perfect stepping stone into (or out of) rangefinderdom.

 

My first was a Hexar AF, and (after a stint with the nifty but

ultimately unsatisfying CL) I've graduated to my first 'real' M

camera with an M4-P purchased from this very same

Rob--clearly a stand-up guy. I say go for it.

 

Cheers,

[jeff_m1]

Thanks guys,

 

Yes, I have decided that it is best for me to grab the G1 from Rob.

 

Its is much more economical for student's budget :)

 

Thanks for all the help!

 

 

Jeff