newbie question

[robert_landis]

Forgive me if this is naive...

 

What makes photographs made with a Leica rangefinder different?

(They do seem to have a certain "thing"). Could you make the same

shots with an SLR with the same f setting, speed etc. and get the

same results? Is it my imagination, or is it really a different

result?

[sprouty]

Hold on, give me a minute to get the hook out of my mouth�there that�s better.

 

Now on to your question. I would be willing to bet that I personally couldn�t tell the difference between a hand-held 4x6 image taken from my $2500 M6 or my 20-year old $117 K1000. Nope not one bit of difference.

 

Regards,

[________1]

They cost twice as much, so the pictures look twice as good. ;-)

[vic_.]

There are various species of people who buy Leica rangefinders. Among stated reasons:

 

(1) They like the simplicity. This is one of the biggest BS reasons, as they can turn off (or ignore) the automation features in other cameras.

 

(2) The silent shutter. I think this is important for less than 3 percent of users. Out in the streets there is plenty of other noise.

 

(3) Using good equipment raises people's technique or passion. Sometimes it is a delusion in the mind of the photographer. You can see a lot of crappy photos on this site. If you look at the highest rated photographs on this site's "Top photo" section, most of them are from digital cameras or modestly priced Japanese SLR's.

 

(4) People have money and can now afford these cameras. The same goes for Hasselblad, Rollei and other pricey brands. As with any expensive item, there is a snob-like group that perpetuates its superiority.

 

(5) The glass. Yes, it's good, but so is glass for other brands. It's a snob thing. Even amongst Leica owners, they sniff at certain lenses while coveting the more expensive ones. Their is no cause and effect consequence in their P&S quality photographs. Pros are in a different league, and there are some here, but they could make exceptional photos using a tin can with a pinhole.

 

Medium format can get you better pictures with less investment.

 

(6) German engineering is superior to Japanese. This is a view held by some photo-apartheid-racists.

 

(7) It's just like any other male-oriented toy, the more expensive it is, the more convoluted logic is used to justify that it is better. That's why it is sometimes called the doctor's/dentist's camera.

 

Hang around, you'll get plenty of dissertations soon.

[Sanford]

Due to the paralex difference of what you see in the rangefinder and what is actually captured on film, Leica photos have a certain dynamic to their composition not seen in SLR photos. Did you think all those pictures of people with the top of their heads cut off was done that way on purpose?

[crackers_.]

Yes, there's a certain 'thing', but it comes off with a damp paper towel.

[majid]

Leica lenses are excellent, but so are Contax, Nikon or Canon's premium lines. The biggest difference I see is that the lack of mirror slap will let you take usable pictures at lower shutter speeds. This allows interesting shots where someone's face is sharp, but their hands are blurred in movement. I just love that effect.<div></div>

[paul hart]

You can't fit a Noctilux to an SLR. ;-)

[andrew_hall1]

Of course you can. Just get a Canon adapter.

[andrew_hall1]

...whoops no you can't - at least not without losing infinity focus.

[andrew_hall1]

>What makes photographs made with a Leica rangefinder different

 

Because most other rangefinders have a leaf shutter which is even quieter and induce less vibration. They also make daylight fill flash a piece of cake instead of a form of torture. ;-)

[gerry_szarek]

Andrew if you buy a Hexar RF daylight flash isn't a problem, and it uses Leica lenses!

 

GS

[yi_fay]

I don't know if there's any difference but to me, it is not the result that matters, It is the process. I choose equipment I which enjoy using, whether it is a Leica or SLR.

[lee_shively]

Nothing. Yes. No.

[andrew_hall1]

I know, Gerry. But I need a high mag finder for my 90mm - even the framelines on the 0.85 are a bit too small for me. (And no, I don't have money burning a hole in my wallet for the 1.25x magnifier.)