Now a Believer!

[matthew_pulzer]

Well done Paul - you won't regret your investment. Get used to the Leica bashing, it comes with the territory. Nothing comes close to using an M. It's hard to define, hard to explain, but when you've used one for a while everything else feels like a piece of throw-away, mass-produced, plastic, corporate crap (there's a simple explanation for this by the way).

 

Then of course you look at the images and the real reason for the outlay just jumps out at you. Sure, not every time and there'll be duds. But more often than not photographs taken with an M just sing in a way that nothing else does.

 

If others can't see it, so what? Not everyone's a wine taster, or even wants to be. You can see the difference and that's what counts.

[._._z]

<i> The scan isn't very good, and even if it were good, it wouldn't show the difference.

</i><p>

 

Ilkka, if true, how then do you explain years' worth of posts here of people praising the

unique, apparently (to them) discernable look of Leica-made images posted that could have

been taken by other cameras?

[travis1]

If Paul is happy and his wife can see the difference, good for him I say.

 

Personally, I agree with Kevin in that SOME Leica lenses really shine at maximal apertures. The 35/2/asph is one example. Whether others feel the same is really not important.

 

Likewise Paul.

[stephen_w.]

Paul,

 

I see the "look" you describe, as well.

 

I bought the SLR sinker when I was advised to get a Nikkormat by an "expert". All gone by way of theft. Otherwise, I probably would have "upgraded" my system, who knows?

 

I bought an M3 after I got a "real" job out of college, and saw the difference after the first roll.

 

As an aside and reason: my uncle shot Leica for the times he would bring his family on road trips and overseas, generally accompanying one of my three musically talented cousins (at least two instruments each) to international recitals. He's the only person I know that has traveled more than I. I think they went to every National Park. Sometimes I would tag along (allowed to go by my over worked parents). He would shoot exclusively Kodachrome in his only Leica: an M3 body and lens (I don't remember which one, probably a 50 Coll.), and other film in the Canons he had. As boring as his slide shows were: ONLY posed shots in front of scenery, the "look" was magnificient! I was hooked. I never thought of his "old fashioned" camera as for fondling.

 

I continued to take classes, soup film, and do darkroom work at 231-1/2 N. Main by the hour. Then I gave up while at the College of Engineering.

 

So, now I'll buy lenses ensured from research that I'll be able to get my money back if I am not satisfied from field testing. Hence, my buying and selling on this forum.

 

BTW, the GF uses an Olympus P&S Miju/Mijo/Mojo (I don't remember), and the resolution at times is "better" handheld, as I posted a while back. But, it never delivers the "look". It is an event recording machine.

 

So, if you like the results, continue shooting, and leave the tripod mounted newsprint testers do what they do best: peering through loupes to see if they can read the personals at the corner of the frame.

 

There ARE other benefits to Leica rangefinder use than just resolution and contrast, need I list them?

 

Steve

[Spearhead]

When I was a kid, they made us read "The Emperor's New Clothes."

[stephen_w.]

Maybe a time for either for a better printer, better printing technique, or for a younger clientel than the pretentious Coke bottle viewer types that can afford to buy prints that their "frinds/contemporaries" do that belong in a book (or not) than on the wall.

 

No one can show someone what the other cannot see or discern.

[james_.1]

Hey Jeff Spirer, where's Scott Eaton...I think we need more expert opinions.

[stephen_w.]

The Earth appeared flat, and the sun revolved around the Earth until the 1992 according to some "Gurus".

 

http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/71.htm

[stephen_w.]

Artifex Vivere Longus

[markci]

<i>

Are you allowed to post to this forum when your high on angry-envy drugs? Isn't this supposed to be a forum for people whose eyes/cortex can appreciate leica lenses?

</i>

<p>

If you think either of these photos shows anything special to be appreciated, you need some serious help.

[._._z]

<i> Are you allowed to post to this forum when your high on angry-envy drugs? </i><p>

 

It's nice that you ask before you do it.

[._._z]

<i> I see the "look" you describe </i><p>

 

Talk with Ilkka. <p>

 

<i> I wonder what the point of blind people hanging around a leica forum to slag off

beautiful pictures is. </i><p>

 

I wonder what your point is in tarring people as "blind" who honestly say they don't like a

particular photo.

[__jon__]

>James . Photo.net Patron, feb 22, 2004; 08:39 p.m.

 

>Hey Jeff Spirer, where's Scott Eaton...I think we need more expert opinions.

 

Hee hee!

[Brad_]

Paul: Way cute kid, way poor photograph - please don't take offense. There appears to be

nothing in focus. Keep practicing, 1/15th sec is tough without a tripod. There's also some

weirdness along his arm where the red/black meet. It's not a lens/camera issue.

[h._p.]

>>leaving aside the fact that the supplied definition is wrong<<

 

Here's one definition: "Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation."

 

Hey, it was a little joke. Must we really put a smiley everywhere to avoid flames?

[stephen_jones4]

Here's a crazy idea: why don't the chaps who don't like/own Leica gear think about playing in another municipal park: maybe the one down the road with the grafitti on the walls?

[andrew_kleinfeld]

New believer is right, but it isn't just the lens.

 

I have decades of experience with everything from Minox to 4 x 5, and consistently

do best in available light w Leica.

 

The reasons are (1) the lenses are great (2) the cameras work very smoothly, and

don't shake when you press the shutter (3) no mirror flipping reliminates a source of

shake (4) light weight and good architecture lets you hold it better, eliminating shake

(5) the center of gravity is further back - lenses are lighter than SLR, eliminating

shake

 

I like bigger negatives when I can manage the camera, and used to walk around NY

with a 6 x 9 technical camera, but with a bad back, I've gone over to Leica for the

portability. Amazing available light quality considering negative size.

[Guest]

<i>Aren't people getting tired of Nikon/Canon/Mamiya users who hang around a Leica forum solely to piss on our parade?</i> Stephen Jones<P>

Most of these are Leica-users, too, as far as I can see. Given the endless succession of posts by some believers decrying <I>Nicanons</i>, SLRs, other formats, anything Japanese and Chevys, heh, and now cigarettes, well, what's sauce for the goose....<P>

I think people just take against evangelical fervour, especially when dodgy tracts are presented as proof.<P>

Arrogance, to be attractive, must have some substance to it.

[david dutchison]

Well Paul, if you're still reading this thread, I'd say that a good part of what you and your wife are seeing are the benefits of shooting with any rangefinder camera; the absence of camera shake induced by mirror movement.

 

The fact that the M is a heavy, solid camera with a superbly dampened shutter adds to this effect, and when coupled with one of the finest lenses ever made, I can well accept that you'd see a difference in hand-held shots.

 

 

If you were to put your SLR on a tripod, there might not be much of a difference (assuming your kids stayed still long enough for you to set-up), but hand-held? sure.

 

It ain't all in the lens.

 

Cheers, D.D.

[david dutchison]

<The fact that the M ... adds to this effect,>

 

Er, meant to say "further reduces this effect", it's late.

[thomas_sullivan]

It's the photographer, not the hardware. The biggest difference in final output is a result of the person behind the camera. A hack can make a Leica look bad, and a genius can make a throw away cam look good.

 

....and Karen, before you start blasting away at grant too much....he uses Leicas....and digital, and Nikons, and Contax, and Hexars, and Mamiyas, and Rolleis........if one is to be beleived by actual experience with the hardware, I would venture to say that one should take what grant says with a large amount of credibility.

[thomas_sullivan]

whoops.............that Karen comment belongs to another thread..........sorry bout that

[travis1]

If gear is not important, why try so many brands?

[nesrani]

Good point, Travis.

[thomas_sullivan]

well, I can't speak for grant, but for myself.....curiosity. At first, to see if all this talk about one being better than the other is indeed true. And yes, to a certain degree some cameras do, do things differently than others....I hesitate to say better, because what is better for me may not be better for someone else. For instance, Canon, I feel has the fastest autofocus around. Now, why would a landscape photographer need this. They wouldn't. Come to think of it, why would a landscape photographer need a quiet small format pinpoint sharp Leica...........they wouldnt........they need a medium format monstrousity, at minimum.

 

The reason to try different formats, focussing aids, manufacturers, film, chemicals, paper, etc is to find out as much as you can about all the tools available. To that extent hardware is important. What I am saying is that without the brains, or heart, or eye behind all that equipment.......without that human being to make all the decisions, the equipment is useless. A big massive pile of junk. If you can't create a picture............if you can't create an image.......then Leica, Hassy, etc aint gonna change that. But, if you can CREATE an image, then you can do it with anything they put in your hands.

 

So, like I said, the photographer plays a bigger role in the final image than the equipment does. That doesnt mean that the role of the equipment is null, it just means it is actually pretty far down on the list of required items, especially in comparison to the photographers ability.