Any reason for me to keep my M7?

[john_van_rosendaal]

Just before leaving for a two-week trip to Holland, I bought a M7

with a 50mm Summicron. The purpose was to use both the M7 and my

Canon 10D DSLR and decide which one was going to be the keeper.<P>

Upon receiving the M7, I loved it. It felt right, it's a beautiful

piece of machinery, it was faster in use than the M6 I previously

owned for a brief period. I fully intended to use it quite a bit in

Holland.<P>

Looking back at these two weeks, I found first of all that I didn't

get as much time for serious photography as I had hoped, which

actually made my Yashica T4 P&S the most used camera.<P>

But in the cases that I could have used both the Leica or the 10D, I

often found myself leaning toward the 10D, often with just a 28/2.8

lens (which makes it the equivalent of a 45mm lens). It was just

faster to use, gave me more flexibility and - if I felt like it - I

could easily add my 70-200/4 to a small bag and get tele

capabilities. In all, I only shot one roll with the Leica and about

500 shots with the 10D.<P>

So, other than the wankler/fondler argument, I can't find any reason

to keep the Leica. I still hesitate, though, in part also because it

would mean that I gave up on film for my serious photography and I

fear I'll keep coming back to film, scouring eBay for interesting

film-based cameras (cheaper than the M7). Am I missing something?

Has anybody here gone through the same process?

[john_a.]

How can you compare the build quality of a D10 to an M7? No match. I hate buttons and crazy menus. I need those dials. I will never give in to the the digital market, until Leica makes a digital M. I bought a film scanner to go digital. Just my 2cents.

[stuart_richardson]

Well, I have a feeling you are going to get biased responses, but one actually irrefutable reason to choose the leica over the 10D is durability. The M7 is going to be a useful camera for as long as there is film to put in it and someone to fix the electronics. The 10D is a much more complicated beast, and it is also digital, so you may have interface problems in a few years. Also, it will become more and more obsolete as the years go by. That said, it is a great camera, so do what you think is best. My choice would be the leica, but that's just me. Good luck.

[kevin m.]

"I found first of all that I didn't get as much time for serious photography as I had hoped..."

 

Was this trip taken with friends or family members? Did you go out by yourself solely to shoot pictures, or were you out sightseeing with others and brought the camera "just in case?"

 

If I'm out with my family, I bring my Olympus Stylus Epic. Every time I bring my 'real' camera bag along on family outings, it ends in frustration.

[stuart_richardson]

Oh, I forgot to add that I am somewhat in a similar situation to you right now. I have a canon t-90 and a Canon F1-N. You can make a very strong argument for the T-90 being the best manual focus SLR ever produced. It has an incredible array of functions, the ergonomics are fantastic, and it is a true class A camera. The problem is that it is now almost 20 years old. Mine is still going strong, but eventually it is going to fail. When it does, there are not going to be any parts to fix it, let alone people who remember how. The F1 is a totally different story. It is another unbelievable camera, but it is totally manual. If it ever has a problem, any good camera repairman should be able to fix it. The solution is to keep both. If you cannot do that, I would stick with the more durable.

[bds1]

Maybe get an M3? you'll find it a joy to use, I only use my M6 when I have to use flash

 

B

[travis1]

You know, you can actually do some serious photography with the T4?

 

The only reason to sell the M7 is if don't want parked cash, IMO.

[dzeanah]

Use what you like. If the 10D is more your cup of tea than the M7, then enjoy using it and don't stress over camera choice. There is the issue (or non-issue) of film-vs-digital though. What's the largest you've printed? Have one of those made from the 10D -- if the output is good enough to your eye, then you shouldn't have any regrets.

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

John---You are not doing yourself any favor by traveling with three camera

systems. A working professional rarely does that. Frankly, it's too much to

think about. You need to simplify and just use the Leica. Leave the other stuff

at home and just shoot with the M7 for a while. Try that and see how it works.

For some reason, I'll never understand, there's a running theory that Leicas

are not good for vacations or travel with family. This is nonsense. The Leica is

best for those situations. (That said, if you have a two-year-old lurching

around the house you might be better off with an

autofocusservomotormatrixmetermotordrivemonster.)

[victor_cruz1]

Hi John, time for a reality check. Sell the M7. You seem more comfortable shooting with today's point and shoot technology and there's nothing wrong with that. Serious photography is not exclusive to film or manual focus cameras.

[robert_vanlane]

I bought a D1x and used it for the Asian Winter Olympics.

It was a great camera but found it heavy , confusing and difficult to use. I sold it.

 

I had a M6ttl , I felt embarrassed to carry around a camera that many people can't afford.

I sold it.

 

I replaced it with a beatup M2 and I enjoy using it because it wasn't expensive.

 

As for digital , I still have 2 but they're P/S type. One is a very compact type that fits in my shirt pocket and the other one has a F1.8 lense on it. I still have all my Nikons and but I only pull them out if I have to use 135mm to 300mm.

 

If I were you I'd sell the M7 and buy a user grade M with recent CLA for $700-$800.

I think it's impossible to have one camera that can do everything.

Combine the 10D and Leica system.

[felix_erazo]

John, I think what you are going thru is "THE NOVELTY PHASE" a new digital camera that inspires you, shooting whith worrires that you will run out of film and you feel good about it. But to tell you the thruth, I've seen and fooled around with the 10d at B&H. You cant compare the leica's built to the 10D. To much of a plastic feel to it, but it takes great images. Enjoy it! but if i were you, I wouldn't get rid of it.

 

My digital system is a nikon coolscan 4000 and a coolpix 5000 which hardly gets any use these days.

[hans_berkhout]

It's not a good idea to buy new equipment when you are about to leave on a trip. If this M7 is your first M Leica, I strongly advise you to shoot with it for a year before you decide what to do with the beast. Don't use any other camera. One film per week. The more quipment you own, the more indecision, doubts, dissatisfaction etc.

[sammer]

I don't think you could pick two more different modern cameras to choose from. Sounds like convenience and telephoto are your main needs... both of which the Canon sounds better suited to. You might as well sell the M7 while the resale value is still fairly high.

[nom]

I was in a similar situation 2 weeks ago. The difference is that I am a diehard Leica-M user for the last 20 years and I always thought that nothing could ever get me away of it. <br>Well, during my 6 days vacation I shot 24 frames with my beloved Leica M6+3E and 400 shots with my silly digital camera. This is 1:16 compared to your 1:14 (film:digital)...Yes, almost the same! <br>Coincidence?<br>The bad thing is that I am very happy with my digital prints too, in fact I think I never had so good prints before. (I had slides though) And my digital is not even a DSLR!<br>Can someone please get this digital "virus" away? I can't use one camera and love a different one! <br>Or, can I???

[2yellowdogs]

<i>I can't find any reason to keep the Leica...</i></p>

You've answered your own question. If you find that you instinctively use the 10D and get more use/enjoyment from it, there's no reason to hang onto the M7 if you aren't going to use it. </p>

 

Sell it. It's not a holy relic (despite what some here may contend). You can always get another if find you miss it. </p>

 

As for 'giving up on film', so what??? Film isn't holy either, and as long as you're getting the results you need from the 10D, why is it an issue that you're no longer using film? </p>

 

DZ

[alexander_tang]

Having used the M6 and the D 100, my 2 cents would be that in terms of feeling and communication, the Leica wins hands down. It might be slower (the M7 is a bit faster than M6 perhaps) if you're catching very quick moments when your main aim is not only photography (for example, snapshots of fast moving friends while playing with them.)

 

Another thing is whether you prefer the technician at the shop to do the processing or whether you prefer to do it at home yourself. This depends on how well you can use the computer, the amount of money you spend on digital peripherals, etc.. For me, I'd prefer pay a bit of money and free myself of the hassle of photoshop manipulation, but this is personal.

 

The last issue is the quality you require. If you are a Leica user, I think you would probably be quite exacting as to the quality of your prints. Then film seems to have the upper hand, at least at this stage, with more latitude, and also a hard copy seems so much more comforting (albeit I also scan negs when I need to share photos online). But then you should be using larger format if you are this picky...a MF or LF slide on a light table beats anything on the screen.

 

Oh and the tele capability. This is again highly personal, but the big reason to use sth like the 80 200 2.8 for me is quite often for games, competitions, concerts, or very tight PJ situations when you HAVE to get the shot, there, then, fast. Otherwise, for leisure photos my personal opinion is the closer you get, the better you'd observe, and you could have quite some time to compose. Rarely would you need to compress perspective dramatically, while blurring backgrounds is still possible with normal wide lenses. In terms of travel photography, especially, I find it difficult to take good pictures of certain beautiful objects detatched from their context, but that might be my own technical failure.

 

Hope it helps.

[patricks]

John, first of all, let me say that I'm in a similar situation as you since I own a 10D w/ some lenses and a M6TTL w/ a 35 and 50 lens. Ever since I got the 10D, I haven't really used the Leica much, but I made the mistake of selling away my rangefinder equipment before and I am not likely to make that blunder again (never say never...).

 

If I read between the lines correctly, it is perhaps not only that you don't use the M7 as much as you initially perceived, but also the fact that you have $3.3K in equipment sitting on the shelf...

I too love the Leica rangefinder style of photography, but realistically I never have time to use the camera the way it was intended. The only time I have taking photos is when we are doing something with the kids, be it in the park, the beach, at the zoo etc.

 

If you feel that you won't take advantage of the rangefinder set-up just sell it. If you don't want to give up on film, just add a EOS Elan 7 for $300 to your Canon system. If you still feel that you want a AE rangefinder for occational use, get a Konica Hexar RF, perhaps a used one. Otherwise a minty M6/TTL for around $1,200 should serve your need for a Leica.

[jay_.]

You might want to check how much you'll lose on the M7 before you sell it. That said it seems like you are just more of an auto-SLR guy which is fine. Consider getting an Elan 7 as a film body to complement your 10D. The user interface is similar. Personally I own EOS, Leica, Nikon manual-focus, Hasselblad plus Rolleiflex TLR and a few other sundry cameras including a D60. I use each in its appropriate venue. For travel I wouldn't dream of taking the D60, partly because I'd miss 50% of the shots while reading through the manual to find out how to change what setting, partly because it's a huge bulky beast compared to the Leica, partly because of all the ancillary crap it's obligatory to carry along (battery charger, Digital Wallet, charger for Digital Wallet, thick manual, Speck Grabber and air bulb, plus a backup Coolpix 5000), and partly because I barely tolerate the resolution I want out of the Leica vs Hasselblad, let alone a digital.

[henry_ting2]

John, you're the exception. Normally people wrestle on the idea whether to get into Leica M due to the hefty investment initially and then once then do, they tend to like it and stay with it. Very few I think wrestle on the idea of whether to get rid of it after they owned and used it. Why don't you give it a bit more time and use it more frequently before you make that decision.

[Spearhead]

Do what feels right for you.

 

The only opinions I've ever found useful for equipment decisions were those of people who knew my work well. That starts with me, moves on to my long-time mentor, and to a number of photographers who have seen my work over a period of time, handled my prints, seen my working style.

 

Everything else is just conjecture based on their criteria, not yours. If you don't think it's worth keeping, sell it.

[roger_michel]

people make way too much out of the durability issue. first off, leicas really aren't that durable. a good knock and the RF is out. the speeds are all over the place. finally, even if it were durable, given the expense of the camera, most people are too scared to take the camera places where it might get the smallest scratch. this moots the durability issue for practical purposes. if you want areally durable mechanical camera get an F2. i have never seen an F or F2 in even the worst cosmetic condition that didn't work.

 

further, and more important, this is not about what camera you are going to take to a desert island forever. if the 10D wears out, you replace it like your car, wife, underwear and all the other important things you use. in point of fact, you'll probably want to upgrade before it wears out (maybe wives fit better under this rubric).

 

just use the camera you'll use the most!!!!!!!!!

[wayne_cornell1]

Years ago, when I was a lot younger, I owned two M3s. At the time I was also shooting with Nikons and I didn't use the M3s too often, after a year or so, I sold them. The minute they were gone, I regretted my decision --missed the feel of the bodies -- missed the sound of the shutters at slow speeds -- missed the quiet, understated elegance. I kept on regretting the decision for about 30 years. Recently, I acquired another M3. I don't use it as much as some of my other cameras but I won't make the same mistake again. Don't know if the M7 has the same sort of effect on a user, but it's something to think about.

[h_kan_th_rngren]

I see no reason to take 3 cameras on a trip. I would take one, or perhaps two (for backup, B&W/color) on a more serious trip. I would not dream on being able to use 3 cameras. If you have little time for serious photography, you are probably best off with a small camera, be it a T4 or an M body with a single lens (or two).

 

Try taking your M7 as the only camera and see how you feel about it. If you find that you do not use it, sell it. You can always buy an old M for a reasonable price in the future if you regret it.

[roger_michel]

just my $.02: i think anyone who is even slightly serious about photography should bring a backup camera on any extended photo outing, especially trips away from your home base. a really fine camera like the contax t3 takes less space than a few rolls of film and protects against the failure of main camera (mechanical or battery), losing the "shot of the trip" becuase your main camera is out of film, provides a small discreet shooting alternative, protects against theft (keep it in a different place than your main camera), and generally gives you more options. a yashica t4 super is also a great camera for this purpose.