Ad
Ad
Ad
Poll
Question: Why do you own a digital M Leica?  (Voting closed: October 30, 2011, 07:03:58 AM)
Because I prefer shooting with a rangefinder. - 9 (45%)
Because I want to use Leica and other M lenses. - 11 (55%)
Total Voters: 20

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: M Leica – Camera or Lenses?  (Read 93446 times)
mardag
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #60 on: November 23, 2011, 06:19:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Here΄s one photographer that uses the M9 for fashion:

http://www.shanidze.com/en/index.php
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #61 on: November 23, 2011, 09:27:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Strange but interesting link; can't think his choice of an RF camera altogether suits some of the subject types, but I understand that sponsorship crosses a lot of considerations! ;-)

How differently people in different cultures see things; makes me wonder why a stock agency will edit everything in a single city and yet think it can cover all tastes... been there, forced to wear the T-shirt.

Rob C
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #62 on: November 24, 2011, 05:42:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Am I right to say that the SOOGZ is to fit 39mm and not 41 as I read sometimes in internet.

Mine is for a 39mm filters,

I ignore if there was a version for 41mm wich seems strange to me.

So, SOOGZ=39mm ? or there where other versions produced?
Logged
Sal_VE
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #63 on: November 25, 2011, 10:44:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Having read all the posts I cannot avoid to put my two cents in.
When young and single I owned and used a great M6, dropped photography after marriage and sold the whole bag of goodies. Recently picked up shooting again (yes I’m divorcing) and bought a second hand M8 with a couple of lenses I knew by hart. Pressed by friends and pros about the fact that modern DSLR are equal if not better than Leica I went on to buy a 5DmkII with zoom and finally got my own view.
I had the chance to go to the same landscape setting twice and take more or less the same pictures, with the 5D the first time and with the M8 the second. 5 out of 84 5D shots went on to the printer while 12 out of 18 m8 shots are now happily showing in my portfolio book. Beside the lighter packing, the kind of involvement I have with the M8 is simply unparalleled. I foresee the picture before pressing the button, I’m in control of focus, aperture and exposure, all this at a much faster pace than the 5D on manual. Most of the time I end up getting what I was looking for and always with a little more twist.
M8 only drawbacks is sensor size and display readability. Using primes requires some PP cropping with file size not always large enough for the print I want. The M8 LCD is almost useless in most light conditions.
Maybe Christmas is the right time to trade the beloved M8 in for the M9.
Conclusion: it is not about range finder nor lens usage. Is the whole experience together with size and weight that make the M the most rewarding tool in my bag.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #64 on: November 29, 2011, 03:05:33 AM »
ReplyReply

If I may slip in an opinion, as a non-owner, it's this: I'd love to have an M9 for one huge but simple reason - size. I find that carrying a camera as habit is impossible to achieve when thinking in terms of a single-lens reflex. It just weighs too damned much and takes up so much physical room that it's a nuisance if you stop off for a coffee or a snack somewhere; then, going to the rest rooms is even worse with that in tow, and as for a tripod... of course, that's on the assumption that you are travelling alone or are very trusting.

Now that I'm thinking about it, a further reason comes to mind: I don't like RF focussing, but as my eyes fail me, I am coming to accept zone focussing as the only way I'm going to be able to do it, regardless of viewfinding system. So much for my longer lenses :-(

Rob C
Logged

DeeJay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 250


« Reply #65 on: November 30, 2011, 05:11:38 AM »
ReplyReply

DeeJay

I think Cooter has said more or less what you seek to hear already... go spend the money!

Rob C

Thanks, who's cooter and where is it been spoken about? I've looked in this thread and can't find anything.

Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #66 on: November 30, 2011, 12:16:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, who's cooter and where is it been spoken about? I've looked in this thread and can't find anything.




Do a search on the site for bcooter; he's one of the best pros we have here. You'll come across him quite regularly on the Video/Motion side of the action. You can accept his opinion on things photographic - he's not only been there and done that, he's still doing it!

Rob C
Logged

HJW
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #67 on: December 08, 2011, 01:07:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Basically, Leicas are the cameras I've had all my teenage and adult life. I've had other cameras during that time; often many but Leicas remained. I started with a IIIg and Ig and today have an M6, an M7, an M8 and an M9. The M6 and the M9 get the most use. In the last 50 years I've never had fewer than 4 Leica lenses and at present have a lot out of which I choose combinations for various reasons. An M9 and Summilux 35 would be the last camera/lens combo I would get rid of. As a straight picture taking machine, the M9 continues for the most part what Leicas have always done: take pictures without getting in the way, and with lenses you can trust to deliver at all apertures and under all conditions.

For telephoto and travel I mostly use m4/3's, and for paying work I mostly use Canon with tilt/shift lenses. For my own, general use I use Leica M's.

Henning
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #68 on: December 09, 2011, 07:19:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Basically, Leicas are the cameras I've had all my teenage and adult life. I've had other cameras during that time; often many but Leicas remained. I started with a IIIg and Ig and today have an M6, an M7, an M8 and an M9. The M6 and the M9 get the most use. In the last 50 years I've never had fewer than 4 Leica lenses and at present have a lot out of which I choose combinations for various reasons. An M9 and Summilux 35 would be the last camera/lens combo I would get rid of. As a straight picture taking machine, the M9 continues for the most part what Leicas have always done: take pictures without getting in the way, and with lenses you can trust to deliver at all apertures and under all conditions.

For telephoto and travel I mostly use m4/3's, and for paying work I mostly use Canon with tilt/shift lenses. For my own, general use I use Leica M's.

Henning

Only Leica lens I have any memory of is the 21mm, possibly Schneider - can't remember now - that we used to use for room sets for BBC TV in Glasgow. Spectacular b/w 'colour' from it.

For myself, I'd go for the M9 and a 35mm, what I imagine must be the ultimate walk-around combination.

Sadly, all theory today.

Rob C
Logged

schrodingerscat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 370


« Reply #69 on: December 11, 2011, 12:50:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Used M 3s & 4s for thirty plus years, mostly with a 35 1.4. Went digital in '99 and worked my way up to a 5D II with the 16-35 II, a huge beast that felt wrong every time I picked it up. When the M9 came out, bit the bullet and started putting together lenses for it. Have concentrated on legacy lenses as I prefere the subtle contrast characteristics(and a fraction of the cost of new). Images in LR look very close to Kodachrome 25 by default and started dabbling in B&W again.

I just happen to prefere working with a rangefinder, and with the quality of the results will be happy with the camera for years to come. Have also gotten back in the habit of having it with me most of the time. Slung on a shoulder, you almost forget it's there. I've used large format, medium format, and a range of SLRs, as well as doing my own B&W processing(mostly 400 pushed to 800) and printing. Rangefinders are a good fit for me, and I still try and keep the craft of printing as part of the hobby. And no, I don't think everyone else should follow suite.

After almost 40 years of using Leica gear I'm still not a doctor...dangnabit.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #70 on: December 11, 2011, 02:11:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Used M 3s & 4s for thirty plus years, mostly with a 35 1.4. Went digital in '99 and worked my way up to a 5D II with the 16-35 II, a huge beast that felt wrong every time I picked it up. When the M9 came out, bit the bullet and started putting together lenses for it. Have concentrated on legacy lenses as I prefere the subtle contrast characteristics(and a fraction of the cost of new). Images in LR look very close to Kodachrome 25 by default and started dabbling in B&W again.

I just happen to prefere working with a rangefinder, and with the quality of the results will be happy with the camera for years to come. Have also gotten back in the habit of having it with me most of the time. Slung on a shoulder, you almost forget it's there. I've used large format, medium format, and a range of SLRs, as well as doing my own B&W processing(mostly 400 pushed to 800) and printing. Rangefinders are a good fit for me, and I still try and keep the craft of printing as part of the hobby. And no, I don't think everyone else should follow suite.

After almost 40 years of using Leica gear I'm still not a doctor...dangnabit.


But, have you been carrying the camera in a black leather case? Could make all the difference!

Rob C
Logged

schrodingerscat
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 370


« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2011, 09:19:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Great idea, in the grand Hunter S Thompson tradition. Will start poking around on ebay.
Logged
mas55101
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #72 on: December 19, 2011, 06:52:05 PM »
ReplyReply

It's the rangefinder.  The CV 50/1.5 is phenomenal as is the Zeiss 35/2.
Logged
yoni
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


WWW
« Reply #73 on: December 23, 2011, 04:50:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I shoot with both rangefinder (R-D1, M9) and 1dsM3.  I have a love-hate relation with rangefinders. I like traveling light,  shooting discretely, and quick operation in street settings. All things I get from my rangefinder. While I appreciate the quality of the leica and zeiss lenses I have, its really the rangefinder style that is of greater importance to me.
Logged
Anders_HK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1001



WWW
« Reply #74 on: January 09, 2012, 06:24:36 AM »
ReplyReply

If you own (or have owned) an M8 or M9, I'd like to know whether this is primarily because you like shooting with a rangefinder / viewfinder style camera, or because you want to be able to use Leica M lenses (including Voigtlander and Zeiss).

Michael,

I had the Leica M8 which is a lovely camera for the way it handles, simply as a traditionally camera and with digital implemented without any wiz and myriad of buttons but simple control, very manual.

The rangefinder viewfinder was excellent. Having also owned Mamiya 7 a rangefinder felt natural, but it should be like those an optical viewfinder. Now I shoot Hy6 with a waist level viewfinder, which is bright. A "traditional" viewfinder where you see the actual scene through a prime optics or a groundglass is in my view superior to any live view or electronic vewfinder. It is about previsualizing the image prior to capture and because it is bright and real. I fail to see the point of viewing an electronic image which does not accurate represent the scene infront of me, nor that represents the scene after I have processed the raw file.

Only reason I sold the M8 was it was too much money to keep in a system when I prefer image quality from digital back, and because the M8 was nearly same limited in ISO. A higher ISO version and smaller than M series rangefinder would be ideal as a complement. Please make that a Leica! - and less $$ than the M8.

Thanks for asking.

Best regards,
Anders
Logged
hasselbladfan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #75 on: January 12, 2012, 08:30:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Only for the glass.

Over the past 20 years I had surely 6-7 different bodies, but what always stayed constant are my Summicrons.

I am sure even my children will pass them on to their children.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #76 on: January 12, 2012, 12:13:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Only for the glass.

Over the past 20 years I had surely 6-7 different bodies, but what always stayed constant are my Summicrons.

I am sure even my children will pass them on to their children.




That post is steeped in genetics. I may have to refer it. I hope your Summicrons are still working - they tend to let you down as you get older. Or are on heart pills.

Rob C
« Last Edit: January 15, 2012, 10:55:30 AM by Rob C » Logged

Pingang
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #77 on: January 15, 2012, 08:01:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Rangefinder was designed in a time there is not much else and this is 2012, I mean, it is fun to use but not necessary the best way for photography. I love the rangefinder, shoot some picture, the lens factor in today's digital photography played a less important - but still important - roll, so as the choice of it. It is for me for fun (and it is important too), but for serious job, I think DSLRs (or those mirrorless) play better role for me.
The rangefinder system, like my M9, more for the fun and to make use of the lenses already have, not really that the lens play so much magic.


PA
« Last Edit: January 15, 2012, 08:04:16 AM by Pingang » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #78 on: January 15, 2012, 12:41:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Rangefinder was designed in a time there is not much else and this is 2012, I mean, it is fun to use but not necessary the best way for photography. I love the rangefinder, shoot some picture, the lens factor in today's digital photography played a less important - but still important - roll, so as the choice of it. It is for me for fun (and it is important too), but for serious job, I think DSLRs (or those mirrorless) play better role for me.
The rangefinder system, like my M9, more for the fun and to make use of the lenses already have, not really that the lens play so much magic.


PA



Well, I never owned a Leica, but I have printed a few Leica negs in my career! And my experience was that they really were different. The same held true for transparencies shot through Leica glass, and I did print some Cibas from them...

But perhaps it's just a phenomenon with film?

Rob C
Logged

mas55101
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77


« Reply #79 on: January 15, 2012, 06:14:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael, definitely for the rangefinder, followed closely by camera and lens size. For anything other than 28-50 mm's  though, I use SLR's.

Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad