Help me choose a Leica

[douglas k.]

"Rangefinder or SLR ? - I don't care."

 

That statement suggests that you want a Leica only for the brand name. If you think that using a Leica, in and of itself, will increase the quality of your pictures, you will be making a very expensive mistake.

[brambor]

You wrote :

"Rangefinder or SLR ? - I don't care."

 

That statement suggests that you want a Leica only for the brand name. If you think that using a Leica, in and of itself, will increase the quality of your pictures, you will be making a very expensive mistake.

 

****************************************************************

 

Well let's talk materialistic for a bit.

 

Do I want a Leica for the brand name ? YES! My reasons however have nothing to do with bragging rights. I'm thinking that by buying a Leica I will ensure best chances that it will be servicable in the far future because while I might not be able to get spare parts for my Konica T1 I will be very likely able to get spare parts for M2 just because Leica bears similar aura to Harley Davidson.

 

Do I think it will improve the quality of my pictures? Not really; although it might slightly improve camera shake issues as I think it is well thought out ergonomically. I already have good Canon EOS outfit with fast lenses and I already have great Konica outfit with fast lenses. I have had my share of humiliation after taking pictures with my Konica without the light meter so I don't expect huge surprises with the Leica. It might help me take a photo I would not get otherwise if my bigger cameras were in the trunk of the car.

 

Will I make an expensive mistake? Leica has one of the best resale values in the world. I can sell it to get my money back.

[douglas k.]

"I'm thinking that by buying a Leica I will ensure best chances that it will be servicable in the far future..."

 

I don't want to start an argument, but this isn't a cost effective method for getting long service. It'd be cheaper in the long run to just buy a new Canon EOS (or whatever you prefer) when -- if ever -- your old one becomes unrepairable. That way, you'd also be able to enjoy the latest technology. That would be considerably cheaper, since Leica's are terribly expensive up front and, judging by the posts to this forum (as well as my own experience) they are also costly to maintain and repair. But if you just want to own a Leica because (fill in name of preferred great photographer here) used one, then go for it.

[Allen Herbert]

just buy a new Canon EOS (or whatever you prefer)

 

And then the next new Canon Eos, and the next...and again and again. Douglas has deep rich pockets, and he loves to spend, spend. spend. Anyway, someone dropped a Leica on his bad toe, once. He swore he would get them. So, there.

[Allen Herbert]

Or, was in the case, that his dad used to smack his bottom a lot? He's dad owned a Leica. There, that's a thought!

[Allen Herbert]

;)

[lutz]

Rene, although I have never used or owned one - the CL as mentioned in one of the posts further up is indeed one great alternative - PLUS: it is not true that the lens speed is restricted to f/4. The 40mm is not only reputed to be one of the sharpest Leica lenses ever, it is a true f/2 lens and falls right in between the 35 and the 50 as for focal length. Give it a serious consideration and expect to find a CL/40 kit far below $1000.

[ole_tjugen]

My answer to questions 1), 2), and 3) is - FED-2e.

 

Any FED still in working order is likely to stay so for the foreseeable future. No batteries, all metal, built like a tank (T-54). Takes any Leica screw-mount lens. Frequently comes with a copy of the collapsible 50mm/f:3.5 Elmar, and a very good copy it is too.

 

Buy one (I bought mine on Eb*y for about $50), play with it a while, see if you like it. THEN think about a Leica if you really need that name.

[bob_smith34]

I'm confused. If his post said Leica lenses weren't the best image-makers available in 35mm, you would be tearing him up. He asks for advice on what Leica to buy, and he gets torn up for wanting a Leica. Unless you don't think a Ferrari will make you a better driver, you can't have one.

[michael_kastner]

To get back to the original question, I'd say (a) get a used M6 TTL. I find mine sturdy enough, and I can use the battery (yes, ONE battery, a lithium type 3V e.g. Duracell DL 1/3 N, Philips CR 1/3 N or Varta CR 1/3 N) for up to 80 36-films. No problem. An M6 Classic can have battery (and other) problems, but if you prefer those problems, then get a Classic. (b) The "standard" M lens is either a 2/35 or a 2/50. If you ask 100 people here, it's about 50:50.

[._._z]

Bob, I'm confused. This is a 5-month-old thread, and you thought everyone who posted

here would still be reading this to respond to your question?

 

I think it's clear that it was an overbroad newbie question that demonstrated that the

question indicated that Rene was too lazy to do the barest research or read the forum.

 

In the intervening months Rene's kept his Canon system, went digital, and just bought a

TLR.

[michael_kastner]

Well, you didn't say <i>I</i> was confused, and I'm not confused. I too noticed that this is indeed a 5-month-old thread, and I thought first that Rene (if he still existed, so to say) probably already bought everything he thought he might be able to use and like. BUT, then again, there are

new newbies every day, and you do know that most of them never look back to see what might have been asked and/or answered 5 months ago. Chances are, however, that they <i>might</i> look at this thread today. That's why I got back to the original question.

[._._z]

That's why I got back to the original question too -- do some reading before you ask

overbroad questions.