david_killick

How about a Leica mini 3? The smallest and cheapest Leica you can buy

by far but still a great performer.

Steve Holloway's images on the site above really sparkle. Old lenses

can be great, but even so the image is certain to be softer at f1.5.

Even the beautiful old pre-asph f/1.4 35mm Summilux which I have used

is soft wide open. Do you want a soft image or an ultra sharp one? Do

you want the lens to perform similarly at all apertures? Sometimes it

is just a matter of taste. I understand a lot of Leica's subsequent

investment has gone into improving lens performance at full aperture.

The old Summicron f/2 is fine wide open, the new one would be even

better. Do you need the extra speed? If so, and if you can afford it,

I reckon the f1.4 Summilux would be your best bet. Another question:

do you need 50mm or would you be better off with a 50mm 'cron and a

fast 35?

You may have seen the controversy about HCB, now in his 90s, having

his picture, taken by distinguished fellow photojournalist David

Douglas Duncan, published in a book called "Faceless". HCB - who made

his reputation by taking so many candid shots of people - was angry

that his image was being used without his permission. That issue

aside, the interesting thing was the picture showed the great man with

a Leica minilux. He has always favourered simplicity. I read that just

about all his pictures were taken with a 50mm lens, a few but not many

with a 35mm. Look at his great B+W images from the late 30s onward and

one would be hard put to tell what camera he used for each shot. Some

of the early ones have astounding clarity; others are more noteworthy

for their masterly composition than technical superiority. Apparently

HCB switched from photography to painting for a while but is obviously

still very much involved with the subject.

From New Zealand too my heartfelt prayers to all Americans and to all

peace and freedom-loving people throughout the world who have been so

deeply shocked by this unspeakable tragedy. I remember standing on the

top of the World Trade Center in March with my wife and my cousin, who

lives in New Jersey. How we admired the view and waited until the sun

went down to watch and photograph this magic city sparkling at night.

The utter horror of what has happened is almost unbelievable. It puts

so many other trivial things into perspective. Let us just pray that

the forces of goodness and peace triumph. God bless!

Angelique -- I live in New Zealand though I have relatives in New

Jersey and have heard some of the New York City dealers are good (try

Photo Village). However I feel it may be worth your while biting the

bullet and paying the money for an authorised Leica service. They can

even replace the whole shutter if necessary. That way you know you

have a 100 per cent reliable camera that will stay that way several

lifetimes. Good luck!

Angelique -- to back up what others say, yes, the slow speed sound is

perfectly normal. Mechanical shutters have less tolerance than

electronic ones - meaning their stated and actual speeds may differ,

but if the speeds are consistent and you get consistently good

results, why worry? The fastest shutter speed is liable to be the most

suspect, but apparently on some early Leicas the slow speeds no longer

function at all. Of course, they can all be fixed. Another concern is

the light-tightness of the shutter, a potential hazard on all old

Leicas. Shoot a few frames without a lens fitted to test this out.

The celebrated Stephen Gandy at www.cameraquest.com has lots of good

advice. See his M buyers' guide. To quote just a couple of points:

<p>

"The first thing experienced buyers do is listen to the one second

speed. It should be smooth, relatively on time, and without

hesitation. A M camera weak point is slow speeds which are way too

slow or hang up entirely. Remedy cost: $100-200 overhaul

<p>

* Open up the back and watch the shutter through all  speeds. Every

time you change speeds, you should be able to tell a definite

difference in the shutter speed as the shutter is held up against a

light."

<p>

* On 1/15th, you should be able to definitely hear the whirling of two

different speed gears.

<p>

Hope this is of help. Enjoy your M3. Cheers, Davi

I would like to agree with a previous David and stick up for the

minilux. So everyone raves about he Contax. Sure, it has a bigger

finder, cool looks, faster shutter speed. And the titanium coating

does wear off the minilux. But I believe the Contax is quite a lot

more than the minilux. Is it that much better?

I've found the minilux produces excelent results, but for "Leica

mystique" or character, you really have to go for an M or an old LTM,

just for fun.

You may be interested in a review in the British magazine, Amateur

Photography, earlier this year, which rated minilux v Ricoh GR1 and

R1, Minox 35GT, Olympus mju, and Yashica T5. The minilux won, with the

best lens, followed closely by the T5 (T4 something I believe in the

States). They didn't test the Contax, because no model was available,

as the T3 was about to replace the T2. However, a later test rates the

T3 extremely high.

However, my personal view is that lens charts by themsleves do not

tell the whole story. You have to feel empathy with your camera.

Another tiny P/S I find produces excellent results is the diminutive

mini 3 at a fraction of the price of the titanium masterpieces. I

wonder if anyone else has used this model

Olympus 35RC, purchased when I was 12. Was then, and still is, an

excellent design, with its shutter priority automation, bright

rangefinder (the secondhand one I bought has dimmed now), and shutter

speeds and aperture info in the viewfinder. Great fun for producing my

own B+W prints, and I couldn't see why people needed hefty cameras.

Lens is nice, but doesn't have the resolution or tonality of Leica I

think. A disadvantage compared with the M construction is the need to

replace leaky light seals.

I have produced many pleasing pictures with SLRs and find PSs handy,

but perhaps because my first serious camera was a rangefinder, this is

still my preferred design. I also have an old 35RD but don't really

need it so may sell it.

Do cameras kill people? Are they evil? I don't think so. If Hitler had

concentrated on producing Leicas and VWs and building Autobahns

instead of invading Poland and launching WWII the world would have

been a far better place. Even so, I agree the symbolism of the

memorabilia is disturbing. I would personally prefer a camera without

that inscription. It is interesting to note that the Allies themselves

had no qualms about usinig Leicas themselves during the war.

Just before you do rush out and get a Oly or a Contax, just another

plug for the Leica minilux which has a fine lens and really is not

that big. Another choice, if you can find one, is the Leica mini 3. A

truly tiny camera and simplicity itself to use. I got one for $100. My

wife loves it and it produces fine results.

Just a few more thoughts. Yes, the M6 and 35 ASPH has to be the most

enticing, if most expensive choice. Not that price matters if it is

really what you want - it will pay off in the long term. Not all

Leicas are Ms though. The purists may scoff at the point-and-shoot

miniluxes, but they are tiny and achieve good results. At the other

end of the scale are the original screw or threadmount (LTM) Leicas.

The choice is analagous to driving an MG TC classic sportscar, or an

MGF new spostcar. More info, try www.cameraquest.com,

www.photographyreview.com, or www.camerareview.com. Good luck.

Karen - tricky, isn't it? To me, it boils down to a simple choice.

Mechanical or electronic? Of course, the M6 has electronics but only

for the metering, otherwise it will have a very similar feel to all

the earlier Ms. Either you like, or don't mind the whirring autofocus

and autowind of the G1, or it doesn't bother you. You may love how

easy it is to load, and appreciate all its electronic features. Some

people are infuriated by the bottom-loading Leicas; I don't mind in

the least. The G1 definitely has more features (top speed 1/2000 or

1/4000 for the G2 I think), but do you need them? To me, the Leica has

a jewel-like mechanical quality which makes it a pleasure to use.

Older 35 rangefinders had this too to a certain extent.

As for lenses and results, both Leica or Contax will challenge the

abilities of any photographer. I find the 50mm the most underrated

lens in the world, but teles and ultrawides open up a whole lot of

possibilites. Another possibility is the much vaunted Voigtlaender

system.

An important consideration is weight. Al rangefinders are more compact

than an SLR, but they do vary.

A word of warning on Leica: it's addictive! If you like it, you will

want more!

Thanks guys, looks like the IIIC is definitely the best value at about

a quarter of the price of a IIIG. The IIIG looks brilliant but then it

would have to be a choice of that v the M3. Bob: no more bargain IIIGs

around? I suppose your Alfa was a good price too. Must admit the

"mint" wartime IIIC looks tempting - "an investment" I am told, but

probably overpriced. Leica prices don't seem to necessarily relate to

useability! I also read the early postwar IIICs weren't so good. True?

As for lenses, I wonder how the Summitar stacks up against the Elmar?

Does it perform with flair or flare?

Rate Pan F at ISO 32 and develop in Perceptol. Diluted developers seem

to produce better tonal range; concentrated more contrast.

I keep getting tempted by Leica LTM gear to complement my M3. I am

especially keen on the compact size for travel, and the quirky nature

of the wee classics. Basically, they just look fun! But I want good

results and reliability too. I was intrigued by Andrew Shanks's

postings on the Elmar lens. But what to buy?

Options:

Most expensive: 1943 Leica IIIc with original case and 5cm lens (not

sure which one). Apparently in mint condition.

Other cameras here in NZ are rated only poor, fair, good, or very

good.

- A choice of IIIb 1938 or 1950 IIIc with 5cm 3.5 Elmar and 3.5cm

Summaron with finders to be sold together.

- IIIbs, Cs, F or G, plus either:

- Summitar 5cm f/2 (cheapish, why?)

- Elmar 5cm f/2.8 (quite expensive, but in good condition. Would also

fit current hoods and filters)

An early straight III with Summar has now gone. I can't inspect all of

these, so would value your advice. Which bodies are better? Pre or

postwar? Strangely, a pre-war IIIb is selling for more than a postwar

IIIc. And which lenses? I like the idea of the collapsibles. The 2.8

Elmar might be a good bet. The Summitar is a lot less but is it any

good?

Yours in anticipation.

Try Ektachrome 100S or 100SW. Saturated colours and fine grain make it

an ideal for landscapes.

Try Ektachrome Elite 100S or 100SW. Saturated colours and fine grain

make it an ideal for landscapes.

I have seen a 1957 50mm Summarit f/1.5 for sale for a good price. How

does it compare with an early f2 Summicron? I find the Summicron - eve

an old one - excellent at low light and maximum aperture.

Some useful points to ponder here for everyone, so thank you 161 for

having the courage to talk about such a horrid experience; and I hope

you find the support and strength to move on. But it takes time.

Being assaulted is scary. When someone assaulted our car with a

baseball bat a few years ago, having mistaken us for someone else,

that was scary.

The first thing is to get out. Things break and can usually be

replaced. People break and can't. Don't worry about getting even, just

thank God you are still alive. However, try to spot details that you

could describe to police later on.

Doing a self-defence course might help you come to terms with what

happened and give you useful skills. You would hope to never need

them, but it would be nice to have them.

The second point is that violence can happen anywhere, even in a

genteel town like Melbourne. Don't let one bad experience sour you.

Not everyone is a sadistic moron after all. But exercising caution and

not straying by yourself into a likely trouble spot with an expensive

camera - EVEN if you are a highly paid pro _ would seem prudent too.

The pros at my newspaper don't. It's just not worth it.

Few people seem to have raised the vulnerability or otherwise of

Leica. In my experience, few people apart from other photographers

(not generally regarded as an especially dangerous and desperate bunch

of cut-throats) actually recognise an M series Leica. Big SLRs and

gadget bags, video cameras, and digital cameras (which may cost more

than an M6 anyway) seem more tempting targets for thieves.

So don't worry about going out and about with your Leica. Just watch

how you go. And vaya con Dios

Some very useful advice for everyone here and some interesting points,

so thank you 161 for having the courage to talk about such a horrid

experience; you have raised very valid issues for a lot of people. I

hope too you will find the strength and support to move on. Not

everyone is a sadistic moron after all.

But it does take time. Being assaulted is scary. When someone attacked

our car with a baseball bat some years ago, having mistaken us for

someone else, that was scary.

Don't worry too much about getting even; just thank God you are still

alive. The first thing is to get out. Don't worry about property.

Things can generally be replaced. People can't. However, try to spot

useful details that you could describe to police later on.

The second point is that violence can happen anywhere, even in a

genteel town like Melbourne. But exercising caution and not taking an

expensive camera into a likely trouble spot - or indeed going there at

all - seems prudent too.

Doing a self-defence course might be a good idea. It would help you

come to terms with what happened and teach you valuable skills. You

would hope never to need them, but it would be nice to have them

anyway.

Finally, few people seem to have mentioned the vulnerability or

otherwise of Leica. In my experience, few people apart from other

photographers (not usually regarded as an especially dangerous and

desperate bunch of cut-throats) actually recognise an M series Leica.

Most people think it just looks like an old-fashioned camera. Big SLRs

and camera bags, video cameras, and digital cameras (which may cost

more than an M6 anyway) appear to be more tempting targets for

thieves. So don't be scared about taking your Leica out and about.

Just watch how you go!

And Vaya c

Which is best, a Jaguar S type or E type? All Leicas are superbly made

machines capable of excellent results. The obvious answer is to get

both the M3 and the M6, and maybe a screwmount too, but in the real

world more mundane concerns often intrude...Every time I rationalise

about my M3 it doesn't make sense; every time I go out and use it I

enjoy its handling and ease of use. The main thing is the great

finder, but yes, the meter - such a simple thing! - would be the main

advantage of an M6. But if you ever wanted a self-timer, Leica deemed

serious photographers didn't need one on the M6 and sacrificed the

space for the meter.

I read that the reason Capa and others used Nikon or sometmes Canon

lenses with Leica bodies in the 50s had very little to do with

performance. It was because they were cheaper. The Allies deemed

Leica's patent post WWII was unenforceable, which then spurred

Japanese manufacturers to copy the German designs and put them on the

market at a fraction of the cost.

I agree for critical shots you really do need a meter, but of course

B+W and colour print film are a lot more forgiving than slides so

there is a little room for error...er...creative variation. And I

agree it's a good idea to hone your skills by "guessing" (pre-judging)

the exposure, then checking with a meter to see how close you were.

Chris, the minilux is undoubtedly a first-class point-and-shoot camera

with an excellent lens, and although it lacks the classic feel of an M

or screwmount camera, it is compact and unobtrusive enough to take

anywhere, which is a big plus.

Most times, you will find the P setting fine. Infinity mode is great

for landscapes or shooting through windows. Remember to reset it!

Setting the distance scale manually is not really that useful, since

it relies on guesswork.

For portraits, set to f/2.4 and the background will blur - but not

that much because 40mm is still relatively wideangle. It does activate

a higher shutter speed though (1/400 - look on the LCD) - good for

action shots.

It is interesting that Leica dropped the aperture priority control on

the minilux zoom but kept the manual distance setting - a shame in my

opinion since it is a useful feature.

One more thing: to get the best out of your minilux, try blowing up a

favourite picture to 8 x 10 or even 16 x 20 (use 100 ISO or slower

film). You can't really get the best out of a Leica lens with postcard

machine pr