I've owned a Leica M3 with a 35 Summilux. I now own a couple Canon VT Deluxe and VT Canon Rangefinders with 50mm and 21mm lenses. EXACTLY the same experience. Wonderfully machined compact but solidly built cameras with quiet shutters. Being left eyed, the baseplate trigger mechanism allows me to keep my eye to the viewfinder without interruption. Leica is wonderful and extremely expensive. The Canons are wonderful, and very reasonably priced.
I'd agree with this statement, Canon LTM glass is amazing too. Owning both a Canon P and a Leica M3, the only major differences are the square RF patch and the frame lines only being there for whatever lens you're using. I honestly think the Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM is as good if not better than my 50mm Summicron.
For street photography, I use the Rollei 35S camera. I love its build quality, pocketable size, fantastic lens (40mm f2.8 Carl Zeiss Sonnar), and the very bright viewfinder with clear frame lines. For many people, the Rollei is a quirky camera, but it is a great tool for street photography due to its small size and quiet shutter
Well thought out video and I think you hit the right note. Yea, I'm one of those people who bought a Leica mainly because I wanted a Leica. That said, I've owned my M6 for a while, picking it up used before prices went crazy I certainly ca't afford one at today's prices. I was shooting rangefinders - Canon and some Russian models - and if I'm being honest to myself, the Leica doesn't deliver any significant advantage from an image-making standpoint. But the M6 is my go-to camera, and paired with a Summicron 35 makes for a capable, compact kit that does nearly everything I want out of a camera in my day-to-day shooting. I'm a complete hobbyist shooting solely for my own pleasure, and I'm lucky to be in a position to cater to my whims (and still afford film). Thanks
Agree with lot of things, as a Leica m6 owner. The thing is that this camera begs me everytime I go out, to take her with me. All of the other ones are too big a bulky to even take it as option most of the times. Then the other super important thing is how quiet the shutter is. In many circumstances its the best of my options . I’m a hobbyist and passionate film photographer, I just want to remember my life through simple shots, and to do it I need a reliable and portable system, so high quality p&s or Leica m6 with 35/40/50 mm lenses only. And if I really want to go crazy I take my Carl Zeiss Contax slr system.
I use my Leica M10 mostely for Portrait work. It gives me the pure Photography feeling that i love. I fell way more connected to the pictures and models. Also its just a joy to use :)
The Visoflex 020 converts the M10 into an SLR, not only that but into a universal platform. I shoot macro with my Micro Nikkor and NF to LM adapter, telephoto with same adapter and a 500mm. I can mount my old M49 Takumar lenses, all my Nikon AiS lenses and even some AF ones. They dropped dramatically in price with the M11 and the Viso 2. I got one "NOB" for a song.
30 years ago, I started with the Nikon FM. I liked how I could align the metering by adjusting either aperture or shutter speed. Always nailed the shots. Then I progressed to the FM2. I never found the same haptic experience until I recently acquired the Leica M5. Photography has become mindful again.
A Leica M3 had been on my photo bucket list for decades - an itch scratched coming on two years now via a 1957 double stroke, that I discovered after the fact, is from a batch of 4,000 bodies that incorporated the best features of the preceding production and improvements that appeared in subsequent cameras. Now fully serviced and adjusted it's a joy to use and I'm fascinated by the back story that I'll never know - whether it was sold in Germany from new or shipped off I know not where. What I do know is it ended up in Canada at some point - the wax Leica seal on the lens mount carried a 'J' that denoted a well known repair tech out there. Mine was bought from Japan, so who knows how it travelled out there. I wish I knew who'd owned it before me, what images they took and so on. I just find it fascinating...
You might be interesting in reaching out to Leica themselves with the serial number. I’ve seen them reply to emails with original receipts, purchase history etc…
I own an m6, multiple Nikon FM2s, and multiple medium format cameras. And I agree 100% with everything you have said in this video. Perfect summary and you covered off all the angles, including the vanity/collector perspective which, to be honest, is a big part of why I and many others payed the premium for it. Plus Leica glass is so nice.
I have two rangefinder lenses that outperform any SLR lens I have by a margin. The Leica Summicron 50mm f/2 DR. It's a very old lens but is as sharp as a 50mm f/2 lens can get. It's noticeable sharper than high end 50mm lenses I own for SLR systems. And maybe even more important from a practical point of view, the Summicron DR has a distance scale that connects distances to f-stops with a lined marker AND has a dedicated 7m mark which is important because 7m is the hyperfocal distance for 50mm at f/11, an f-stop I often shoot at on the street. The Zeiss 45mm f/2 for my Contax G2. It's even sharper than the Leica Summicron and has better contrast, better flare resistance as it's newer glass. The Zeiss 45mm can probably outresolve most modern lenses designed for digital cameras. My advice to people looking into the M system on film right now: Be careful when you buy an M6. M6 prices are reaching MP territory slowly. It doesn't make sense. Buy a NEW MP instead, see below why. Don't buy used MPs. They cost as much as new ones directly from Leica. Why? Because Leica has long wait lists on MPs, you might have to wait on your MP for many months, if you want a black MP, it might be a year of wait time. When you buy a used one (at new prices), you can have it instantly. Don't do it though. New MAs and MPs come with THREE YEARS OF WARRANTY on mechanical failures. Repairs can get very expensive. You WANT that warranty. One more thing to add: If you wear glasses and you shoot primarily 28mm or 35mm, you might want to look into contact lenses. Leica M bodies don't provide a great experience for people with glasses as the frame lines become too tight in the finder. I cannot see the edges of a 28mm frame on my MP with glasses. It barely works for 35mm. If you shoot 50mm - not a problem, neither on the MP nor on the M3 I own. Don't bother shooting anything longer than 50mm or anything shorter than 28mm on an M. That's SLR territory in my opinion.
Good advice, and I agree on buying an MP over an M6 now. Because of the demand though there's not enough supply, and people are charging new prices for used MPs!
Great images shown in the video, and I'm also a big fan of Daniel Milnor. I have been wanting a film Leica for the last 5 years, and it has been heartbreaking to see the prices keep climbing. I am a dad and husband, so dropping $5k on a body alone isn't something I can do lightly. I have recently realized that I have dedicated way too much thought to attempting a mental "justification" of a purchase of a Leica M-A, and the bottom line is that my Sony A7 III with M lenses adapted technically does as much and more than an M-A would, and if I am going to buy a Leica, I will have to be comfortable buying it for the sole purpose of it bringing me joy in its use and the images I produce with it. I also have an affinity for mechanical watches, as well as fountain pens and well-made chef's knives, and the bottom line will always be that I could get the exact same or in some cases better results with cheaper tools. But I have decided that the objects I interact with every day bringing me joy in their use is really worth something, and it's a fruitless endeavor to try and assign a dollar value to the sparks of passion a well-crafted camera brings about for making beautiful images, or a fountain pen brings for writing my thoughts, or a hand-crafted Damascus steel knife brings when preparing food for my wife and kids. I think while many will look at the those who purchase Leicas as fools or victims of marketing hype, I am content with growing old knowing I pursued joy, within reasonable means, wherever I could find it. So all that to say... I'M GONNA BUY A LEICA
When I returned to film cameras 2.5 years ago, I bought a Konica rangefinder. Although she may now regret it, my wife asked, instead why not get a Leica? She insists on European engineering for many things. First I was outraged at the thought of spending that kind of money, on a film camera????? Then I bought one. Then the pandemic came, and money lost value, while vintage cameras soared. Although I don't shoot it 1/100th as often as my mirrorless or film SLRs, there are those Leica moments in life that just wouldn't be so sweet without that certain mechanical marvel. Hopefully the frequency of reportage situations goes up in the years to come. Even today, a Leica can't be a bad investment. If you're interested in doing something nice for your kids, buy that Leica. The best legacy to pass down. That Sony may not have the appeal. The best time to get into something was ten years ago, or right now.
Well said, that is an aspect of it that I only breezed over, but deserves its own discussion. I completely get it when it comes to other things like pens and various physical tools!
Spot on, Kyle. I am in the same situation of being a dad and husband and it is tough to wrap our minds around the idea of splashing that much on a camera. But aging gives the maturity to appreciate the craftsmanship and feeling of these pieces. I also keep my writing through fountain pens and time through mechanical watches. I have also decided that I will get a Leica.
Anytime I hear someone mention my name I feel a cringe coming on. So how nice was it to hear your compliment! Thank you. The M is a lightning rod these days, which is probably why the prices are where they are. Such a strange little machine but for what it was designed for, maybe the best cam ever. Again, thank you and I officially miss Australia.
Exactly right! Keep up the great work you're doing (sorry for just referring to you as a "UA-camr" btw 😅 I know your work goes way beyond that, and has for a while) Any time, and hopefully you can visit Australia again soon!
I would consider myself, “Experienced,” as a photographer, advanced, and honestly within my newfound love for Paris France and it’s streets, as a laboratory of documentary usage, my Fuji’s are holding me back! I’m giving the Leica path a serious good look. I need speed! Autofocus and other menu issues are superfluous within hyper electronics. Simplicity= speed! Also, lens tech is an unavoidable factor with Leitz glass.
My first Leica (M10) was the 9th camera I’ve owned (of 7 that I currently own). It is also my go to camera today. I would not have appreciated the M10 without owning my other cameras (film canons and digi Fuji). I use my Leica for literally everything, from school pictures to street and landscape. That being said I have a real soft-spot for my old Fuji X100S and am from time to time pondering the X100V simply because it is small and cheap in comparison but the muddy pics keep me from pulling the trigger. I’m also considering the Ricoh as my pocketable camera. So with all that the Leica is what I prefer but I would not have appreciated it without experiencing other cameras first.
Agreed 100%! Personally I could never justify the expense of a Leica system knowing that there are other cameras out there which do exactly the same thing or even better such as the Konica IIIA 😃. I’ve been out on the streets now for about 7 months and my Konica IIIA is a beast of a camera on the streets. It’s the total package; the experience and the stellar results. Yet as much as I love that camera when it comes to portraiture nothing beats my Nikon F100 with the Nikkor 85 1.8. Or really any of my other Nikon SLRs. I feel inordinately at home with Konica IIIA’s rangefinder experience but I do agree it was a steep learning curve out on the streets and having shot with it as my daily driver for one year I’ve definitely learned that inherently I’m an SLR shooter. To each their own. Nothing wrong with buying a Leica M camera and for people such as yourself you can feel the authenticity of its usage but you can always point out the ones who bought one just to parade it around. Great video Hashem!
A good, honest appraisal of the M. I bought a Zorki 4k in the 70s. I collected the Leica brochures knowing that I could never afford one.... Then digital came along and 8 yrs ago I noticed that an M2 / 3 body could be had for a few hundred quid. (£) I bought one quick - sharp! I only wish that I'd bought a lens as they were cheap too. I've used Russian lenses ( excellent) and recently purchased a 7 artisans 35mm f1.4 which is great for low light. Sadly, the Leitz lenses have shot up in price again.... Possibly due to the current popularity of film. My main observations are that the M is perfect for my preferred use. ..family, documentary. The downside is that I'm constantly worrying about it getting damaged. I own a Minolta SRT 101 which I bought in my teens. It still works and has only been serviced once. It's almost the perfect camera but it's so heavy that it has it's own gravitational field. 😁 All the best from the UK. 👍🏻
Spot on, Hashem. I definitely didn't need my M4, I've done the types of photography (including documentary and reportage) I use it for over a number of years with my DSLR (and first 35mm SLR back in the day) but I'm happy to admit I did want one. It's now my daily use camera as well because they are just really nice to use, and the compact size of body and lens make for a camera that's easy to bring along just about anywhere - this isn't unique to Leicas, though, there are plenty of other options for that. I've been really happy with mine, and being all mechanical it should have a long life ahead of it for me to keep enjoying it.
Hashem this was such a balanced video and I really agree with you on all your points. I don’t wish to own a Leica as I know it wouldn’t suit me and that money is better spent on film in my case. This was such a humble and useful way of saying to people…Why are you actually buying this camera?? As always great work and you continue to be a consistent, honest and well rounded figure on UA-cam. Thank you 🙏
This is all so true. I use an m246 because I think it’s the most unique FF sensor (along with all the monochrom versions) on the market and I dedicated to BW. Also, the biggest reason is I shoot film with an M and had glass already. If I didn’t shoot film there’s no way I would get a digital M. I’d stick with Fuji or Canon exclusively. Also, for Film, the nikon F3 is every bit the equal of my M6 and is the best manual focus SLR I’ve ever used. I actually use that for rough areas
i used NIkon Fm2n over 20years and i recently get my M3. I think that the only advanced of Leica M3 over fm2n is camera smaller in size (but indeed, it is heavier), brighter viewfinder (but more difficult to focus as i can use the whole screen to focus in fm2n), lighter/quieter shutter sound and vibration, and perhaps, the resell value
The peripheral view advantage of a rangefinder is only true when you do not need to wear glasses, or when with glasses you use longer focal lengths (>= 50mm). On my Leica M with glasses, I hardly see outside the 35mm frame lines, I cannot even frame precisely with the 28mm frame lines with glasses.
Reportage is definitely the best reason to buy some kind of rangefinder. To be more specific about the best reason to buy a Leica M, I’d say it’s because the M-mount is basically a universal mount. So many M and LTM lenses are available, from many companies over nearly the last 100 years!
Very honest video. I have a Nikon fm2 and I've used Leica cameras in the past. For most things I would say the Nikon is hands down better. You can get really incredible lenses on the f mount, like the zeiss otus family... Leica main advantages are compact glass that performs well and it is really made for street photography and journalism, other than that it's not very efficient.
Yes, I also think the Leica M system is useful mostly for photographers specialized in reportage style photography. I tried to use it for people photography and failed miserably because I couldn't focus precisely and quickly enough to able to shoot at for example f1.4. I ended up with lots of badly exposed and incorrectly focused images even after half a year of shooting Leica M. Yes, the camera looks amazing and is incredibly built, but the technology behind the system is imho completely outdated. Leica should have added sensor stabilization and a electronic or hybrid viewfinder already a long time ago. So I sold my Leica M system already several years ago. Now I use a Sony Alpha 1 and am very happy with it. If I want to shoot film, I use my Nikon F5 or my "Texas Leica" Fuji GW690 III for infrared landscape photography with Rollei Infrared film.
Ya, I been thinking of getting into the M for its size factor. I would like to think the glass is exceptional at the prices Leica demands but have no experience with it. I shoot mostly Landscape, Nature, macro &, some wildlife. I have been doing 2 opposites lately with getting into shallow depth of field for some flower/nature & focus stacking for close-up/macro also. Shoot a Nikon D810. Been thinking of Sony & Fuji MF also. I'll know when & if I pull the trigger but, I must admit I lust for the Leica M! Dan Milnor=thumbs up! Even if use like 10 cameras now!
If I want to perfection, I’ll just shoot on a mirrorless digital. If I am contemplative, my 8x10. But when I want to just capture how I feel spontaneously, nothing beats an M imho
Very truthful. I am old, using Leica-M , my M3 is 55 years old, bought new! No Digital Leica will last that long. Ever! I use it a lot. I no longer do hard news(I'm 78).When eyes are tired esp. Using SLR, it's fun to frame and shoot with a RFDR. Framing! My M6 has frames for 28mm, 35mm (90mm), 50mm (75mm) combined and 135mm. Well it sounds great. It Ain't! The longer the lens the smaller the frame. I eventually saw my 28mm on M6. It's the whole viewfinder. If something is coming into your frame, one has a millionth of a nano second to make adjustments. The 35mm better but lousy. The 50mm frame is way smaller than image area.. Way more coming to you! Loading older Leica-M, M3,M2 are slower but never fail. The drop loading of M4's and M6,M7 sometimes slip. I average 38~39 exposures on 36exp film. That's a big saving! Soon you can afford a digital M! Some lenses BLOC the viewfinder. Older 28mm,35mm and 50mm don't. Those high speed 0.95 seldom hit exact focus! You may have to bracket your focusing! The RF was made for a maximum of f2 or with a push f1.4. It's mechanical physics. Leica lenses flare. older lenses have softer glass and easily damaged by cleaning! Use a UVa/Skylight filter for protection< Services are costly, fewer places to be truly able. I know 1st names of repair folk and often names of family! If you are starting film photography the SLR are super. Lenses are reasonable. One could assemble a good kit with 28mm,35mm the 50mm, an 85 or 135mm. It would cost less than a service adjustment on a Leica-M. I used Pentax Spotmatic, later K-mount in KM and K-1000.My eyesight found the Pentax gave me headaches on long shoots, wedding, fashion etc. Nikon-F was magic. But my favorite camera is still my Leica-M3. Oh! The Pentax system NEVER EVER required services..
interesting topic, especially when talking about perceptions about Leica system and what the cameras are really suited for, although can be used for anything really. its great for street photography and if you watch Everybody Street about NYC, you'll see most of those folks have a Leica as their tool for street or documentary photography. Not terribly interested in a Leica for myself, but interesting in general about the topic. Thanks for making this video!
You make good points about "suitability for the task", I recently got an M4, then immediately traded it for an M6, which i have found that it is indeed well built and nice to use, but in the end it is just a camera, and wasn't a "life changing" experience. The only reason I pulled the trigger was that I knew this camera will most likely outlast me and can take a knock.
Totally agree as I am going through the same thinking process of considering a Leica M system after moving from Canon ecosystem. After using the X100, I wanted to move to a camera with a rangefinder and Leicas are only one of few that still have this feature in their range.
I ve used Leica M’s for 50 years and for travel 35f2,50f2,90f2.8 lenses are the most compact travel kit giving superb image quality throw in the light hector 135mm for the odd long shot . I think for closeups the phones are unbeatable or a micro 4/3 camera with a couple of zooms will cover most other aspects. Bill H
Great vid! Maybe I’m alone in this, but I actually find using the rangefinder patch for focusing to be… fun! Setting aside zone focusing, there’s something about the process of the rangefinder which has its own merit from a pure enjoyment perspective. For some reason it seems like a nicer experience than focusing peaking or zooming in on a EVF. Again, maybe just me.
It is fun! It can actually be easier than a manual focusing screen in some situations ,where you might second guess yourself or in tricky lighting. The patch provides a pretty good confirmation in comparison.
My package of reasons to use the M6 and M240: 1. Shooting experience and pure fun with a beautiful manual camera, for me this feels like the essence of photography 2. See 1. 3. Compact size, no comparison with other full-frame bulky and heavy SLR cameras. 4. I love the look of pictures shot with Leica lenses. 5. When taking portraits, it is much easier for many people being photographed with a small rather than a big camera. That‘s it, the use of the M system is for me not dependent on a particular form of photography like street. I use it across genres, and Resort to SLRrs or my Fuji x-pro 2 only for specific reasons, e.g. when I really need an autofocus.
After many years with Nikon dslr’s, I entered the Leica world with a Q. I sold all my SLR gear to get to the M system. I now own an M10M and a M8. Saving to get an M10r (not M11). I don’t agree on the fact that the M system should be exclusive to street photography. It’s great for everyday photo, portraits, landscape, travel. From the M10p the sound of the shutter is just amazing, you’re not losing your time In the menus like you would on another camera, ir’s small, discreet and lightweight (if you come from the Dslr world).
Sounds good man! I use mine for all that stuff too (mainly street, travel, and general photography.. for portraits and landscapes I use SLRs more) and am not saying that M's should be exclusive to street. M10R is a good choice 👍
I've owned Leica M cameras since the 1970s alongside of SLR and (now) EVF cameras. The Leica M suits me and my photography very well, the modern digital M with Live View is versatile enough for not only the street and reportage photography that you mention but also for macro, copy, and some telephoto work. Would I buy one if I needed to do a lot of tele work, sports work, etc? Of course not. But as a still life, reportage, street, macro, and tabletop shooter, the M works just fine.
Really god observations and point of view. Thank to share this. You give the "names" for the reasons someone really "should buy" one and particularly the reason I am looking to buy one after do the homework/research (reason why I stoped in this video). This reportage experience advantage is a truly important aspect I never listened someone talk about before (using such words and didactic). Besides, to add to such discussion "Shoul I buy one Leica" I could mention and share such points (I hope this helps the readers): _if you shoot film, a rengefinder - principaly Leicas - are quieter (feature relevant in street and overseas travel) without the mirror slap that the majority of SLR have, besides the metal vertical curtain some have, which are noiser too _the viewfinder of Leicas are more bright than SLR in general (I have a F100 and FM3a, and even being great cameras, the viewfinders are not so bright) and upgradable if you want nowadays (you coul fit multicoated glasses and anti-flare stuff in the old Leicas if you want) _SLRs, in my opinion (after see this video), it is like: you see more the picture you are taking than the world when looking through the viewfinder (which is nice for some uses, like you said, portraits, landscapes, arquiteture, etc, situation where the framing are more important) _instead in a rangefinder, I imagine you have more this sense of "I am seeing the world", as you mentioned, and than the picture comes into play, and this could change the way you look the world and photograph (which make sense in such "reportage use") _leicas probably give you a more mechanical and tactile experience, such Hasselblads 500 (which I have, and really like to use) and this kind of manual cameras, without a lot of eletronic features and plastic pieces _Besides LEICAs, alternativaly: Voigtlander Bessas are really nice cameras too (R2, R3 and R4, the first ones are not so realiable they say) and "newer" compare to Leicas, Canons P, and similars, but with some plastic pieces (and the price is equal some Leicas nowadays). And the fixed lens rangefinders like Canonets and cousins (Olympus SP, etc) are a good start point, with some donwgrade aspects BUT cheaper =) PS. Recently I get in hands one Nikon Nikons V (mint condition), camera which are made to zone focusing, with a cristal clear viewfinder. And then I have such realization "WooW, I seeing the world really clear now and them... what I want to fit in such framelines". Make sense? PSS. I will use more the Nikonos before buy efectivaly a Leica one to be sure about everithing i said (probably I will buy the M4-P for the price, framelines, upgradability and discretion, since the M4s Blacks are $$$$)
Excellent video a great points. I have been a Fuji shooter for 8 years but have been really looking at the LEICA M system specifically the M10 over the last year. However I've stopped myself due to the fact that I also shoot a lot with off camera flash. Any experience with off camera flash with the m system?
Great video. - I couldn't be happier with my M6 as an everyday documentary style camera that I hope to keep for the long haul. Would love to pick up a used digital M at some point to supplement the M6 for those times where film isn't the most ideal.
I happen to shoot M digital alongside film, practically i save some bucks on the high performance lense, but i agree very much with you. Despite being the most versatile M can do any type of shooting there’s always a better alternative But for simplicity, nothing beats the M system
Thanks for starting this conversation. I have a question about frame lines. Can you do a video showing frame lines, as seen through the viewfinder, the way they look and how they are used ? I have found very little videos showing actual frame lines and explaining the way different lenses are used with them. I noticed that some lenses actually protrude into the viewing area and some lenses like a 40mm may not show up correctly because there are no frame lines for that in between size. How do you work with that? As far as a small compact all manual system I was thinking of Leica or Nikon FM2/FM2a. I already have a Nikon F100 but it’s not exactly compact. Thanks for your videos. FW
Thanks for watching. I'll add that to the list! Although, it's a difficult thing to portray through video/images without using a tiny wide lens from a phone, etc... and distorting the actual perceived view. It's one of those things which is much better trialled in-person. In the mean time, I would suggest searching for websites/illustrations of the frame lines as shown in the Leica manuals, to give you a rough idea. And you are correct in that lenses like 40mm don't tend to have frame-lines on most cameras (people just estimate or extrapolate using the 35/50 lines etc). FM2 is a great camera, but a completely different shooting style to Leica (not to mention price point) If you're not too fussed about the rangefinder experience and M-mount lenses, I would easily suggest going with the Nikon. And then, maybe try and play around with a Leica later to see if you like it before committing. I definitely wouldn't have bought my first one (M4) if I hadn't used a friend's first.
Film was all there was when I got my 1st camera for Xmas in 1959 (a Brownie Six-20) and kept that way until I got my 1st DSLR in 2009. Probably, if I were your age, I would look at film as something akin to fencing or front loading rifles, and expensive hobby for hipsters. As things were for me, when I got really, really hooked in photography (in college by then) one of the first things I discovered was that I would need to do my own darkroom work if I wanted to pursue my (by then) passion. My father had a Leica IIIf with an Elmar 5cm f3.5 and he reluctantly lent it to me from time to time, and I learned to hate it; thus I worked my a** off to get me a Spotmatic with a 50/1.4 (they came as kits in 1967). Not much time after I saved enough for a stowaway Durst M300 that let me use the bathroom in my boarding house to print the roll *(not enough $ for rolls)* developed in Rodinal 1:50 the night before. A foldable table would go in the shower with the trays and a large bucket as holding wash. After grad, I could migrate to Nikon and eventually an FM2n (of which I own now 3, including a "Year of the Dragon"). My first Leica came to my hands when my father died and (of course) nobody wanted it. I had it repaired, CLA'ed and started shooting it more by nostalgia than anything else; then the opportunity of an M6 within my reach appeared and that was it. It blew the lust for the 4x5 field camera, or the medium format. Forgot completely the 35mm SLR's except for the occasional macro or diving with a housed AF. Since 1968 I started learning the fine art of the darkroom, color and B&W until the digital hecatombe came. By then I had a full frame DSLR and knew that RA4 was dead, Epson was giving me much better color than I ever could get under the enlarger. B&W however was something else. At the time B&W printers were incapable of replicating a fine FB chemical print. Bronzing and metamerism were insulting. I kept in my darkroom until 2016, sometimes creating digital contact negs to print on fiber base paper that would later be toned in selenium. Ilford to the rescue! Their baryta paper line let me make prints virtually indistinguishable from the real thing. Then and there was when I started looking for a digital Leica to supplement my IIIf, M2, M6 and MP. Prices, as you know were out of this world. However I managed to make a pile of analog gear I wasn't using, sold it and got me an M10. This very day, with my M2 on the way to DAG for a repair of the film advance system, I don't miss it. The M10 gets me the best color available. OTOH, for B&W, I have the sweet MP, and for macro I've got the FM2's or can pot one on the M10 with an adapter and focus with the Visoflex. I'll be 76 in 20 days. 😄
I’ve often been close on buying a Leica partly for the rangefinder experience and partly vanity :) but I am mainly digital since 2004 and my sometime film shooting is for fun and for that I have a lovely Pentax Limited primes 31mm F1.8 and 43mm F1.9 and 77mm F1.8 and a beautiful 40yo Pentax MX that the light meter failed so rather than get it fixed I use a Sekonic light meter. Slows the process but with exposure latitude I can guess pretty close once I’ve got a street location zoned in. This a small camera, huge viewfinder and small lenses so it’s discrete and easy to carry. When I shoot this I know I don’t need a Leica but maybe one day when I retire I might indulge myself and get one for a bit of vainglorious fun :)
As much as I yearn for a Leica M System, it is something that is not practical for me personally, at present.. Sometimes you have to let your head rule your heart. Great Video as usual Hashem
I don't mind rangefinder cameras, I grew up with them. But the problem with Leica is that it somehow, in a weird way, they don't have any real competition. Or the hype is simply so large. What drives prices thru the roof. Too expensive for me, sorry, even if I'd really need it. So when using film, I'll still happily snap my Oly OM1 which my daughter bought me for my last birthday. Or my dad's Minolta srT303b... For everything else, my Canons and Fujis will do the job.
Been shooting film SLRs for about 20 years now and I never really considered a leica or any range finder until very recently just as a means to introduce something new and different into my photography. I’m not a professional I mostly just shoot to document my life like family/travel photos. I enjoy the film experience a lot more than digital. I’m also a fan of mechanical /automatic watches so that mentality definitely adds to the desire for a leica. I’ve been very torn on which model to get. But I think I have to just bite the bullet and get an M6. I find myself heavily dependent on a light meter mod of the time and also the m6 currently on sale locally seems to be mint with a recent CLA and I don’t trust eBay listings so yeah. Might hurt a bit financially at the start but this is a buy it for life camera. I hope to eventually reduce my photography gear down to maybe 1 leica and 2 lenses. But I do enjoy medium format a lot and I might still love my Nikon SLRs for other situations. We’ll see.
I love my Leica M6. It's the camera that finally made me fall in love with rangefinders after trying a lot of cheaper RFs. However, you've hit it on the head that it's not for everyone or every scenario. Also not everyone can afford it and even if they can, it may not be the best camera for them.
Spot on. The Leica is a beautiful camera excellent for what it is designed for however I would argue that a SLR is more versatile and if I could only have one camera… well, I don’t know, I’d probably still want the Leica with its limitations 😊.
For me, the only reason I would use a Leica M camera would be to benefit from the very high image quality. Of the rangefinder cameras, Leica's M's have the best rangefinder focus aids. I have tried the Bessa's and Nikon RF cameras and I don't like the slow focus methods. This is why I went with the Nikon F's as my primary camera instead of rangefinder cameras. That and the versatility of compatibility with long lenses.
The all rounder vs the street camera The all rounder can also do those things I think its comes down to preference and are you willing to commit to learning zone focusing, Rf experience If a leica is out of your league , voigtlander bessa are good alternatives , relatively affordable for a body.
I have 2 M cameras, a Konica S2 and a Canon G3 QL17. Lol, but seriously, both get great results and I had hundreds of dollars left for film and printing!!!!
Truth be told you are right - "no one needs a Leica for film photography" , but for me a better question would be, "do you really want a Leica" - Given all the available, and affordable alternatives, that can perform as good if not better in most cases if you're going to be shooting film. But for those few - the heart wants that thing, that the heart wants, even if it is a Leica film camera.
The age old "Do you really need...." dilemma hehe. Yeh, i can safely say i don't really need 2/3s of what i currently have, or at least not really ;) I can justify most of what i have though in some way and i do really use most of it and love most of what i have kept :) But the way to getting to this point has been littered with cameras and lenses that i most certainly did not need and in the end did not get much use either. To your point my first leica was a leica Q, and by that time i had not got back into film again. But for me that was a dream camera in many ways. I know that one is a little different because of its AF, but the feel of the camera was the same as any great leica and got me into both film leica's and other Digital Leica bodies. My first analog leica was the M4 too. And like you i just wanted one more than maybe needed one at first. Such a nice camera. But in reality i used my Nikon FE2 and FM3a a lot more. So that made me sell the M4 in the end. And i thus far have not got another film leica even though i still from time to time lust for a M4 or M2 or M3 at some point :) My M240 now fill the "need" as a reportage camera. I take it a little bit of everywhere with a 28 or 50 attached and it makes for a great companion :) But like you say it certainly is not for everyone and it takes patience to get good pictures out of it. Great vid Hashem, stay safe. /Martin the swede.
Thinking of an M11 or M10R, want an all around travel and doc camera. Does this apply? Q3 could also be another option soon. How do you nail focus every time?
So much gear buying is the romance of it, but it won’t get you out there shooting more; it may even do the opposite because there’s no money left for other photo necessities. Hitting the street with a $$$ camera is daunting. I’d rather use something for which I have a spare or can afford to replace.
I went all-in on a new Leica M system back in 2000. I had no interest in telling others what I had spent for my M6 and trio of Summicron lenses, and it never came up as no one else was interested. It looked like a nice old camera and the name Leica meant nothing to anyone else that I knew back then. 22 years later, this gear would sell for more than double what I paid when new. Though it is good gear, I believe today's values have more to do with Leica reinventing itself as a lifestyle brand than anything else.
Great video. I was lucky enough to get to test a Leica M9P quite a few years go. I went into testing it (for a review) wondering who would want a camera that expensive? 2 weeks later I'd placed an order. While I wish today that I'd gotten a film M body instead of the digital (as the sensor broke and can't be repaired) I can definitely see why people want them - not just for the prestige but because there's something about shooting with one that slows you down, makes you appreciate the machinery in your hands and the scene in your viewfinder and that gives you quite superb optics and potentially beautiful images. As I now have a couple of lenses but no Leica body I'm on the hunt for my next one (film this time).
Hey Darren, that's so unfortunate! I remember working at Michaels in the Service department years ago when Leica was still replacing those faulty corroded sensors, many of them came back. Hopefully, you can get your hands on a good film body and start using those lenses again!
Totally agree on Daniel. All his videos are gold mines, but might leave you discouraged about doing random street photography. None the less, it is a good kick in the but to forget about instagram trends and be more ambitious. Did you ever consider a digital Leica? I remember you had a stint with the X-PRO3, are you still using that? I find it a bit more difficult to get excited about the digital process, not because it is digital, but mostly because I feel like it provides too many options in the way of post editing.
I have! but they're out of my budget, and if I had to choose one I go with the film M... I did try the X-Pro3! It was a loaner from Fujifilm though, so I only had it for a few weeks. I would be happy with that as a digital alternative for my street photography, and might even get an X100V since I mainly use 35mm on the street. I get what you mean about the process though, it's not quite the same!
@@pushingfilm Definitely. I recently bought an M10-R, and although it was nice, it was not $10.000 nice, so I returned it after 1 week. I tend to shoot digital in a similar way I'd shoot slide film (haven't yet found a replacement for color negative or BW). Although $10.000 is only 400 rolls of E100, mentally it's a tough pill to swallow. My M9 will have to do for the time being (It does a good job, just even slower than a film camera)
Well for what its worth, if you want to buy a Leica without dropping a large amount of your savings on an M body, perhaps consider the R series SLR's instead. I know it wont be the same as owning a M body, but it wont break the bank. on the other hand, you wont have the advantages of using the rangefinder for fast street photography as Hasham mentioned, so it would be a compromise. I love my R5 and R8 Leicas, they're beautiful to use, and will keep me happy to I can maybe get an M series Leica one day.
I have OM system with many lenses, and I also buy other cameras now and then, but I haven´t seen why (beyond size and portability) I should buy a Leica yet other than FOMO
I am a huge OM fan and my first camera ever was a new OMF my Dad bought me in High School and you are right about it. But for me, a rangefinder (note, I didn’t say a Leica) reduces distractions to someone who knows what they are going to get for certain types of photography. Ease of focus, and trustworthy speed to focus are two other elements where I love a rangefinder over an SLR, even my beloved OM’s.
With crime raging out of control, I would not be inclined to risk the Leica investment on the street of any city. I have owned and enjoyed using an M3 with Summicron 50/2, but now favor a Nicca, Canon, Nikon rangefinders, with similar experience.
quite honestly, I absolutely agree with everything you said. Last year, I got a BP MP on my birthday (bday gift to myself haha), and it's a fantastic camera. BUT, I sold one of my favourite cameras to get it (it's in the Nikon line, but I don't want to say what it is because the prices keep going up). The camera I sold... I think about it almost daily. It was a dream of a camera; buttery smooth, amazing lenses... I'll probably re-purchase it eventually, because to me it was the pinnacle of the SLR. What I'm trying to say, however, is this: after purchasing my White Whale camera (the MP), I'm not quite sure it was worth the hype. It's absolutely incredible for street photography (silent shutters are beautiful), but for shooting more than street, I think I might actually prefer the SLR. For now, I'll be shooting my Minolta XD-11 for all those other things (another sleeper hit, IMO, and was developed alongside Leica), but I guess it just goes to show: sometimes, the thing you pine after the most isn't always the best thing.
That sense of trial and error is all part of the journey hey! If I used SLR more for my film/personal work than I did a rangefinder, I would similarly get my "white whale" upgrade to the Nikon FE, being the FM3a 😅
Wow great timing for this video. Did you see my discussion video I had with Ulysses on this too? Sorry shameless plug but on my channel with my M10 review series I am discussing exactly every point you made! It's like we are unsurprisingly of the same mindset because we've both had the system for long enough to use it and see it's pros and cons. So glad to have another voice right now and others are finally saying whats need to be said about the system. It's ideal for a certain type of photographer who takes photographs in a particular manner. It's not for everyone and often shouldn't be treated as this luxury item that often people unfamiliar with the system associate it as. Cheers for the great work. Your photography reflects exactly the mindset that makes this system specifically useful. 👍
Agreed! (I think we went over some of this stuff in our little Instagram exchange :-D) But I noticed through your videos that it's a polarising and even triggering thing for some people! Even though at the end of the day, its just about having fun and being creative through photography, right? But also, I think if some people want to treat it mainly as a luxury item and/or collect them (as people might do with certain cars and other things) then that's fine too! My concern is more with the misunderstanding of it's prowess as the ultimate tool or "grail camera" for photography with some newcomers, which it certainly isn't (for most)
I'll never put so much money just for the hype. It's like owning a Rolex when any watch or phone gives you the right time. Of course, street photographers can benefit of this system but you can do the job with any other one. In my opinion, in the first place, it's a question of magical belief that you'll get Henri Cartier-Bresson's talent, or telling to everyone how much you're wealthy.
My opinion on a pure performance stand point there's no reason to choose a lieca over say a Nikon f 1,2,3,4 are 5 those camera are just better a faster an more reliable . Buy a lieca for what it's is nothing more an if you like luxury items let's keep it 💯
Interesting video but my biggest surprise is that very little is said about the end result : the quality of the photos you get out of that camera ? We do photography to enjoy pictures and I would love to know how many of us non professional users could make a true difference between a Leica-Zeiss combination with cheaper alternatives. Shooting experience is important but what about being able to get a just as good picture for a fraction of the price? If you are rich enough to afford it and are vanity minded ok do it but if you are more interested in end result and need to be careful on amount of money spent there has to be just as good options. Even small weight and size is not limited to Leica cameras. Of course I’m not even mentioning the film vs digital debate and prime vs zoom lenses. I have done both over nearly 50 years of photographing and would never go back to film.
Function or performance-wise of course a Leica M would not be able to justify its price. But those are not the only considerations, luxuriousness, history, feel, design, aesthetic, lens options, handling, range finder shooting styles etc all could be a considering factor and it really just depends on who you are and what you need. Also, don’t always look at things from your own perspective, we should think about WHY Leica priced their items so high, there is actually a history to this: back in the 90s Leica as a company/brand was about to bankrupt and close down due to Canon and Nikon’s dominance in the entire camera market, in order to save Leica, its brilliant CEO/Board had decided to change the brand’s position in the market by re-positioning it as a luxurious item, similar to Hermes. This new business direction has successfully bring leica back to life, and hence the high price of Leica and Hermes as we know of today. All these brands started off as humble, functional brands but gradually as the brand’s reputation develops, it allows them to re-position their place in the market.
Legit question - WHY do people prefer that experience for reportage/street/documentary work? Specifically. There are a lot of other lenses that allow zone focusing. Even in the digital world, there are cameras that can be pre-set for exposure. There are many that handle just as fast even for all-manual. There are other designs with a rangefinder-ish focusing prism. There are several different types of TTL meters, and a lot of modern mirrorless cameras let you turn off the information displays if you don't want them. "I wanted one and could afford it" is 100% completely satisfactory for why someone would buy a Leica (or anything else, really). But, for me it comes down to TTL composition being the reason I've never really looked into one. Literally every other thing seems like a wash.
I'm sorry guys, but despite the mechanics of these cameras being top notch and that they lend themselves to certain types of photography, they are still overpriced status symbols. And, most of the people that own them are those that earn more in a month than most of us would earn in 5-10 years. Don't get me wrong, they're great cameras, but why would I pay upwards of $3000 and considerably more for a 2nd hand (or new) camera that I can get the same quality of photo out of something where I'd pay half as much or less. Then, there's the lenses. You can buy a good car for the price of many Leica setups. In any case, with my own photography, a Leica would be just dross and most certainly wouldn't be the right camera for the job. It'd be like going down the road to buy a bottle of milk in a Bugatti or Ferrari, when all I needed was a pushy. All you're really paying for is the "red dot" and the name. Any of the higher end Nikon or Canon rangefinders will give you the same experience for quite a bit less, even though they can still be expensive in themselves (depending on where you buy them). There are plenty of alternatives that will give you the same rangefinder experience and get you fantastic pics. And, for those genres of photography where Leica doesn't really cut the mustard, there are plenty of other cameras to choose from.
It’s good for flexing on your other film friends
I've owned a Leica M3 with a 35 Summilux. I now own a couple Canon VT Deluxe and VT Canon Rangefinders with 50mm and 21mm lenses. EXACTLY the same experience. Wonderfully machined compact but solidly built cameras with quiet shutters. Being left eyed, the baseplate trigger mechanism allows me to keep my eye to the viewfinder without interruption. Leica is wonderful and extremely expensive. The Canons are wonderful, and very reasonably priced.
This is good to know! Cheers
I'd agree with this statement, Canon LTM glass is amazing too.
Owning both a Canon P and a Leica M3, the only major differences are the square RF patch and the frame lines only being there for whatever lens you're using.
I honestly think the Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM is as good if not better than my 50mm Summicron.
@@l0stxs0ulwould you guys said that in terms of user experience, both Canon and Leica felt the same?
Good to hear a left-eyed opinion. I'm left eyed and wear glasses so a lot of cameras can be quite impractical
100% agreed. For landscape work where composition is critical I'd rather use SLRs than rangefinders.
Don't forget macro and architecure shots (typically you want to use TS lenses)
For street photography, I use the Rollei 35S camera. I love its build quality, pocketable size, fantastic lens (40mm f2.8 Carl Zeiss Sonnar), and the very bright viewfinder with clear frame lines. For many people, the Rollei is a quirky camera, but it is a great tool for street photography due to its small size and quiet shutter
I have a Rollei35SE and love it! It's a great compact camera.
Well thought out video and I think you hit the right note. Yea, I'm one of those people who bought a Leica mainly because I wanted a Leica. That said, I've owned my M6 for a while, picking it up used before prices went crazy I certainly ca't afford one at today's prices. I was shooting rangefinders - Canon and some Russian models - and if I'm being honest to myself, the Leica doesn't deliver any significant advantage from an image-making standpoint. But the M6 is my go-to camera, and paired with a Summicron 35 makes for a capable, compact kit that does nearly everything I want out of a camera in my day-to-day shooting. I'm a complete hobbyist shooting solely for my own pleasure, and I'm lucky to be in a position to cater to my whims (and still afford film). Thanks
Well said!
Agree with lot of things, as a Leica m6 owner. The thing is that this camera begs me everytime I go out, to take her with me. All of the other ones are too big a bulky to even take it as option most of the times. Then the other super important thing is how quiet the shutter is. In many circumstances its the best of my options . I’m a hobbyist and passionate film photographer, I just want to remember my life through simple shots, and to do it I need a reliable and portable system, so high quality p&s or Leica m6 with 35/40/50 mm lenses only. And if I really want to go crazy I take my Carl Zeiss Contax slr system.
I use my Leica M10 mostely for Portrait work. It gives me the pure Photography feeling that i love. I fell way more connected to the pictures and models. Also its just a joy to use :)
The Visoflex 020 converts the M10 into an SLR, not only that but into a universal platform. I shoot macro with my Micro Nikkor and NF to LM adapter, telephoto with same adapter and a 500mm. I can mount my old M49 Takumar lenses, all my Nikon AiS lenses and even some AF ones. They dropped dramatically in price with the M11 and the Viso 2. I got one "NOB" for a song.
30 years ago, I started with the Nikon FM. I liked how I could align the metering by adjusting either aperture or shutter speed. Always nailed the shots. Then I progressed to the FM2.
I never found the same haptic experience until I recently acquired the Leica M5. Photography has become mindful again.
I know what you mean!
A Leica M3 had been on my photo bucket list for decades - an itch scratched coming on two years now via a 1957 double stroke, that I discovered after the fact, is from a batch of 4,000 bodies that incorporated the best features of the preceding production and improvements that appeared in subsequent cameras. Now fully serviced and adjusted it's a joy to use and I'm fascinated by the back story that I'll never know - whether it was sold in Germany from new or shipped off I know not where. What I do know is it ended up in Canada at some point - the wax Leica seal on the lens mount carried a 'J' that denoted a well known repair tech out there. Mine was bought from Japan, so who knows how it travelled out there. I wish I knew who'd owned it before me, what images they took and so on. I just find it fascinating...
Like you, I'd love to know my cameras history. It's a 1966 M2. What stories they could tell. 👍🏻
You might be interesting in reaching out to Leica themselves with the serial number. I’ve seen them reply to emails with original receipts, purchase history etc…
I own an m6, multiple Nikon FM2s, and multiple medium format cameras. And I agree 100% with everything you have said in this video. Perfect summary and you covered off all the angles, including the vanity/collector perspective which, to be honest, is a big part of why I and many others payed the premium for it. Plus Leica glass is so nice.
I shoot with two M's and 2 FM2's. For digital I use an M10 (with a Visoflex if I need TL viewing). Beats a 2nd system.
I have two rangefinder lenses that outperform any SLR lens I have by a margin.
The Leica Summicron 50mm f/2 DR. It's a very old lens but is as sharp as a 50mm f/2 lens can get. It's noticeable sharper than high end 50mm lenses I own for SLR systems. And maybe even more important from a practical point of view, the Summicron DR has a distance scale that connects distances to f-stops with a lined marker AND has a dedicated 7m mark which is important because 7m is the hyperfocal distance for 50mm at f/11, an f-stop I often shoot at on the street.
The Zeiss 45mm f/2 for my Contax G2. It's even sharper than the Leica Summicron and has better contrast, better flare resistance as it's newer glass. The Zeiss 45mm can probably outresolve most modern lenses designed for digital cameras.
My advice to people looking into the M system on film right now:
Be careful when you buy an M6. M6 prices are reaching MP territory slowly. It doesn't make sense. Buy a NEW MP instead, see below why.
Don't buy used MPs. They cost as much as new ones directly from Leica. Why? Because Leica has long wait lists on MPs, you might have to wait on your MP for many months, if you want a black MP, it might be a year of wait time. When you buy a used one (at new prices), you can have it instantly. Don't do it though. New MAs and MPs come with THREE YEARS OF WARRANTY on mechanical failures. Repairs can get very expensive. You WANT that warranty.
One more thing to add:
If you wear glasses and you shoot primarily 28mm or 35mm, you might want to look into contact lenses. Leica M bodies don't provide a great experience for people with glasses as the frame lines become too tight in the finder. I cannot see the edges of a 28mm frame on my MP with glasses. It barely works for 35mm. If you shoot 50mm - not a problem, neither on the MP nor on the M3 I own.
Don't bother shooting anything longer than 50mm or anything shorter than 28mm on an M. That's SLR territory in my opinion.
Good advice, and I agree on buying an MP over an M6 now. Because of the demand though there's not enough supply, and people are charging new prices for used MPs!
Great images shown in the video, and I'm also a big fan of Daniel Milnor. I have been wanting a film Leica for the last 5 years, and it has been heartbreaking to see the prices keep climbing. I am a dad and husband, so dropping $5k on a body alone isn't something I can do lightly. I have recently realized that I have dedicated way too much thought to attempting a mental "justification" of a purchase of a Leica M-A, and the bottom line is that my Sony A7 III with M lenses adapted technically does as much and more than an M-A would, and if I am going to buy a Leica, I will have to be comfortable buying it for the sole purpose of it bringing me joy in its use and the images I produce with it. I also have an affinity for mechanical watches, as well as fountain pens and well-made chef's knives, and the bottom line will always be that I could get the exact same or in some cases better results with cheaper tools. But I have decided that the objects I interact with every day bringing me joy in their use is really worth something, and it's a fruitless endeavor to try and assign a dollar value to the sparks of passion a well-crafted camera brings about for making beautiful images, or a fountain pen brings for writing my thoughts, or a hand-crafted Damascus steel knife brings when preparing food for my wife and kids. I think while many will look at the those who purchase Leicas as fools or victims of marketing hype, I am content with growing old knowing I pursued joy, within reasonable means, wherever I could find it. So all that to say... I'M GONNA BUY A LEICA
When I returned to film cameras 2.5 years ago, I bought a Konica rangefinder. Although she may now regret it, my wife asked, instead why not get a Leica? She insists on European engineering for many things. First I was outraged at the thought of spending that kind of money, on a film camera????? Then I bought one. Then the pandemic came, and money lost value, while vintage cameras soared. Although I don't shoot it 1/100th as often as my mirrorless or film SLRs, there are those Leica moments in life that just wouldn't be so sweet without that certain mechanical marvel. Hopefully the frequency of reportage situations goes up in the years to come. Even today, a Leica can't be a bad investment. If you're interested in doing something nice for your kids, buy that Leica. The best legacy to pass down. That Sony may not have the appeal. The best time to get into something was ten years ago, or right now.
Well said, that is an aspect of it that I only breezed over, but deserves its own discussion. I completely get it when it comes to other things like pens and various physical tools!
@@JHurrenPhotography Yep, they still seem to either hold value or better yet, go up in value!
Spot on, Kyle. I am in the same situation of being a dad and husband and it is tough to wrap our minds around the idea of splashing that much on a camera. But aging gives the maturity to appreciate the craftsmanship and feeling of these pieces. I also keep my writing through fountain pens and time through mechanical watches. I have also decided that I will get a Leica.
Anytime I hear someone mention my name I feel a cringe coming on. So how nice was it to hear your compliment! Thank you. The M is a lightning rod these days, which is probably why the prices are where they are. Such a strange little machine but for what it was designed for, maybe the best cam ever. Again, thank you and I officially miss Australia.
Exactly right! Keep up the great work you're doing (sorry for just referring to you as a "UA-camr" btw 😅 I know your work goes way beyond that, and has for a while) Any time, and hopefully you can visit Australia again soon!
I would consider myself, “Experienced,” as a photographer, advanced, and honestly within my newfound love for Paris France and it’s streets, as a laboratory of documentary usage, my Fuji’s are holding me back! I’m giving the Leica path a serious good look. I need speed! Autofocus and other menu issues are superfluous within hyper electronics. Simplicity= speed! Also, lens tech is an unavoidable factor with Leitz glass.
My first Leica (M10) was the 9th camera I’ve owned (of 7 that I currently own). It is also my go to camera today. I would not have appreciated the M10 without owning my other cameras (film canons and digi Fuji).
I use my Leica for literally everything, from school pictures to street and landscape. That being said I have a real soft-spot for my old Fuji X100S and am from time to time pondering the X100V simply because it is small and cheap in comparison but the muddy pics keep me from pulling the trigger. I’m also considering the Ricoh as my pocketable camera.
So with all that the Leica is what I prefer but I would not have appreciated it without experiencing other cameras first.
Completamente de acuerdo con todos y cada uno de los argumentos
Agreed 100%! Personally I could never justify the expense of a Leica system knowing that there are other cameras out there which do exactly the same thing or even better such as the Konica IIIA 😃. I’ve been out on the streets now for about 7 months and my Konica IIIA is a beast of a camera on the streets. It’s the total package; the experience and the stellar results. Yet as much as I love that camera when it comes to portraiture nothing beats my Nikon F100 with the Nikkor 85 1.8. Or really any of my other Nikon SLRs. I feel inordinately at home with Konica IIIA’s rangefinder experience but I do agree it was a steep learning curve out on the streets and having shot with it as my daily driver for one year I’ve definitely learned that inherently I’m an SLR shooter. To each their own. Nothing wrong with buying a Leica M camera and for people such as yourself you can feel the authenticity of its usage but you can always point out the ones who bought one just to parade it around. Great video Hashem!
A good, honest appraisal of the M. I bought a Zorki 4k in the 70s. I collected the Leica brochures knowing that I could never afford one.... Then digital came along and 8 yrs ago I noticed that an M2 / 3 body could be had for a few hundred quid. (£)
I bought one quick - sharp!
I only wish that I'd bought a lens as they were cheap too. I've used Russian lenses ( excellent) and recently purchased a 7 artisans 35mm f1.4 which is great for low light. Sadly, the Leitz lenses have shot up in price again.... Possibly due to the current popularity of film.
My main observations are that the M is perfect for my preferred use. ..family, documentary. The downside is that I'm constantly worrying about it getting damaged. I own a Minolta SRT 101 which I bought in my teens. It still works and has only been serviced once. It's almost the perfect camera but it's so heavy that it has it's own gravitational field. 😁
All the best from the UK. 👍🏻
Spot on, Hashem. I definitely didn't need my M4, I've done the types of photography (including documentary and reportage) I use it for over a number of years with my DSLR (and first 35mm SLR back in the day) but I'm happy to admit I did want one.
It's now my daily use camera as well because they are just really nice to use, and the compact size of body and lens make for a camera that's easy to bring along just about anywhere - this isn't unique to Leicas, though, there are plenty of other options for that. I've been really happy with mine, and being all mechanical it should have a long life ahead of it for me to keep enjoying it.
Hashem this was such a balanced video and I really agree with you on all your points. I don’t wish to own a Leica as I know it wouldn’t suit me and that money is better spent on film in my case. This was such a humble and useful way of saying to people…Why are you actually buying this camera?? As always great work and you continue to be a consistent, honest and well rounded figure on UA-cam. Thank you 🙏
Some level of recognition and awareness is useful for any creative, I think :D Thank you for the kind words!
This is all so true. I use an m246 because I think it’s the most unique FF sensor (along with all the monochrom versions) on the market and I dedicated to BW. Also, the biggest reason is I shoot film with an M and had glass already. If I didn’t shoot film there’s no way I would get a digital M. I’d stick with Fuji or Canon exclusively.
Also, for Film, the nikon F3 is every bit the equal of my M6 and is the best manual focus SLR I’ve ever used. I actually use that for rough areas
i used NIkon Fm2n over 20years and i recently get my M3. I think that the only advanced of Leica M3 over fm2n is camera smaller in size (but indeed, it is heavier), brighter viewfinder (but more difficult to focus as i can use the whole screen to focus in fm2n), lighter/quieter shutter sound and vibration, and perhaps, the resell value
Honest and spot on summary of the ad/dis of Leica. Thank you!
Spot on brother, spot on!
Thanks Coops!
The peripheral view advantage of a rangefinder is only true when you do not need to wear glasses, or when with glasses you use longer focal lengths (>= 50mm). On my Leica M with glasses, I hardly see outside the 35mm frame lines, I cannot even frame precisely with the 28mm frame lines with glasses.
Reportage is definitely the best reason to buy some kind of rangefinder. To be more specific about the best reason to buy a Leica M, I’d say it’s because the M-mount is basically a universal mount. So many M and LTM lenses are available, from many companies over nearly the last 100 years!
Definitely an advantage!
Very honest video. I have a Nikon fm2 and I've used Leica cameras in the past. For most things I would say the Nikon is hands down better. You can get really incredible lenses on the f mount, like the zeiss otus family...
Leica main advantages are compact glass that performs well and it is really made for street photography and journalism, other than that it's not very efficient.
Yes, I also think the Leica M system is useful mostly for photographers specialized in reportage style photography. I tried to use it for people photography and failed miserably because I couldn't focus precisely and quickly enough to able to shoot at for example f1.4. I ended up with lots of badly exposed and incorrectly focused images even after half a year of shooting Leica M. Yes, the camera looks amazing and is incredibly built, but the technology behind the system is imho completely outdated. Leica should have added sensor stabilization and a electronic or hybrid viewfinder already a long time ago. So I sold my Leica M system already several years ago. Now I use a Sony Alpha 1 and am very happy with it. If I want to shoot film, I use my Nikon F5 or my "Texas Leica" Fuji GW690 III for infrared landscape photography with Rollei Infrared film.
Ya, I been thinking of getting into the M for its size factor. I would like to think the glass is exceptional at the prices Leica demands but have no experience with it. I shoot mostly Landscape, Nature, macro &, some wildlife. I have been doing 2 opposites lately with getting into shallow depth of field for some flower/nature & focus stacking for close-up/macro also. Shoot a Nikon D810. Been thinking of Sony & Fuji MF also. I'll know when & if I pull the trigger but, I must admit I lust for the Leica M! Dan Milnor=thumbs up! Even if use like 10 cameras now!
Thank you for putting this together! I knew nothing of Leicas until today, and watching this was really informative. :D
Glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for watching!
If I want to perfection, I’ll just shoot on a mirrorless digital. If I am contemplative, my 8x10. But when I want to just capture how I feel spontaneously, nothing beats an M imho
The right tool for the right job and situation 🙂
Very truthful. I am old, using Leica-M , my M3 is 55 years old, bought new! No Digital Leica will last that long. Ever! I use it a lot. I no longer do hard news(I'm 78).When eyes are tired esp. Using SLR, it's fun to frame and shoot with a RFDR. Framing! My M6 has frames for 28mm, 35mm (90mm), 50mm (75mm) combined and 135mm. Well it sounds great. It Ain't! The longer the lens the smaller the frame. I eventually saw my 28mm on M6. It's the whole viewfinder. If something is coming into your frame, one has a millionth of a nano second to make adjustments. The 35mm better but lousy. The 50mm frame is way smaller than image area.. Way more coming to you! Loading older Leica-M, M3,M2 are slower but never fail. The drop loading of M4's and M6,M7 sometimes slip.
I average 38~39 exposures on 36exp film. That's a big saving! Soon you can afford a digital M! Some lenses BLOC the viewfinder. Older 28mm,35mm and 50mm don't. Those high speed 0.95 seldom hit exact focus! You may have to bracket your focusing! The RF was made for a maximum of f2 or with a push f1.4. It's mechanical physics. Leica lenses flare. older lenses have softer glass and easily damaged by cleaning! Use a UVa/Skylight filter for protection< Services are costly, fewer places to be truly able. I know 1st names of repair folk and often names of family! If you are starting film photography the SLR are super. Lenses are reasonable. One could assemble a good kit with 28mm,35mm the 50mm, an 85 or 135mm. It would cost less than a service adjustment on a Leica-M. I used Pentax Spotmatic, later K-mount in KM and K-1000.My eyesight found the Pentax gave me headaches on long shoots, wedding, fashion etc. Nikon-F was magic. But my favorite camera is still my Leica-M3. Oh! The Pentax system NEVER EVER required services..
interesting topic, especially when talking about perceptions about Leica system and what the cameras are really suited for, although can be used for anything really. its great for street photography and if you watch Everybody Street about NYC, you'll see most of those folks have a Leica as their tool for street or documentary photography. Not terribly interested in a Leica for myself, but interesting in general about the topic. Thanks for making this video!
Love that documentary :-D Thanks for watching!
You make good points about "suitability for the task", I recently got an M4, then immediately traded it for an M6, which i have found that it is indeed well built and nice to use, but in the end it is just a camera, and wasn't a "life changing" experience. The only reason I pulled the trigger was that I knew this camera will most likely outlast me and can take a knock.
Totally agree as I am going through the same thinking process of considering a Leica M system after moving from Canon ecosystem. After using the X100, I wanted to move to a camera with a rangefinder and Leicas are only one of few that still have this feature in their range.
I ve used Leica M’s for 50 years and for travel 35f2,50f2,90f2.8 lenses are the most compact travel kit giving superb image quality throw in the light hector 135mm for the odd long shot . I think for closeups the phones are unbeatable or a micro 4/3 camera with a couple of zooms will cover most other aspects. Bill H
Great vid!
Maybe I’m alone in this, but I actually find using the rangefinder patch for focusing to be… fun! Setting aside zone focusing, there’s something about the process of the rangefinder which has its own merit from a pure enjoyment perspective. For some reason it seems like a nicer experience than focusing peaking or zooming in on a EVF. Again, maybe just me.
It is fun! It can actually be easier than a manual focusing screen in some situations ,where you might second guess yourself or in tricky lighting. The patch provides a pretty good confirmation in comparison.
My package of reasons to use the M6 and M240:
1. Shooting experience and pure fun with a beautiful manual camera, for me this feels like the essence of photography
2. See 1.
3. Compact size, no comparison with other full-frame bulky and heavy SLR cameras.
4. I love the look of pictures shot with Leica lenses.
5. When taking portraits, it is much easier for many people being photographed with a small rather than a big camera.
That‘s it, the use of the M system is for me not dependent on a particular form of photography like street. I use it across genres, and Resort to SLRrs or my Fuji x-pro 2 only for specific reasons, e.g. when I really need an autofocus.
Nice, that's more than enough reason :-)
After many years with Nikon dslr’s, I entered the Leica world with a Q. I sold all my SLR gear to get to the M system. I now own an M10M and a M8. Saving to get an M10r (not M11). I don’t agree on the fact that the M system should be exclusive to street photography. It’s great for everyday photo, portraits, landscape, travel. From the M10p the sound of the shutter is just amazing, you’re not losing your time In the menus like you would on another camera, ir’s small, discreet and lightweight (if you come from the Dslr world).
Sounds good man! I use mine for all that stuff too (mainly street, travel, and general photography.. for portraits and landscapes I use SLRs more) and am not saying that M's should be exclusive to street. M10R is a good choice 👍
I've owned Leica M cameras since the 1970s alongside of SLR and (now) EVF cameras. The Leica M suits me and my photography very well, the modern digital M with Live View is versatile enough for not only the street and reportage photography that you mention but also for macro, copy, and some telephoto work. Would I buy one if I needed to do a lot of tele work, sports work, etc? Of course not. But as a still life, reportage, street, macro, and tabletop shooter, the M works just fine.
Can never get used to manual focus and/or manual exposure. Much easier with cameras that do it for you and leave you to focus on the framing.
Really god observations and point of view. Thank to share this. You give the "names" for the reasons someone really "should buy" one and particularly the reason I am looking to buy one after do the homework/research (reason why I stoped in this video).
This reportage experience advantage is a truly important aspect I never listened someone talk about before (using such words and didactic).
Besides, to add to such discussion "Shoul I buy one Leica" I could mention and share such points (I hope this helps the readers):
_if you shoot film, a rengefinder - principaly Leicas - are quieter (feature relevant in street and overseas travel) without the mirror slap that the majority of SLR have, besides the metal vertical curtain some have, which are noiser too
_the viewfinder of Leicas are more bright than SLR in general (I have a F100 and FM3a, and even being great cameras, the viewfinders are not so bright) and upgradable if you want nowadays (you coul fit multicoated glasses and anti-flare stuff in the old Leicas if you want)
_SLRs, in my opinion (after see this video), it is like: you see more the picture you are taking than the world when looking through the viewfinder (which is nice for some uses, like you said, portraits, landscapes, arquiteture, etc, situation where the framing are more important)
_instead in a rangefinder, I imagine you have more this sense of "I am seeing the world", as you mentioned, and than the picture comes into play, and this could change the way you look the world and photograph (which make sense in such "reportage use")
_leicas probably give you a more mechanical and tactile experience, such Hasselblads 500 (which I have, and really like to use) and this kind of manual cameras, without a lot of eletronic features and plastic pieces
_Besides LEICAs, alternativaly: Voigtlander Bessas are really nice cameras too (R2, R3 and R4, the first ones are not so realiable they say) and "newer" compare to Leicas, Canons P, and similars, but with some plastic pieces (and the price is equal some Leicas nowadays). And the fixed lens rangefinders like Canonets and cousins (Olympus SP, etc) are a good start point, with some donwgrade aspects BUT cheaper =)
PS. Recently I get in hands one Nikon Nikons V (mint condition), camera which are made to zone focusing, with a cristal clear viewfinder. And then I have such realization "WooW, I seeing the world really clear now and them... what I want to fit in such framelines". Make sense?
PSS. I will use more the Nikonos before buy efectivaly a Leica one to be sure about everithing i said (probably I will buy the M4-P for the price, framelines, upgradability and discretion, since the M4s Blacks are $$$$)
Well said. I really want to try a Nikonos sometime!
Excellent video a great points. I have been a Fuji shooter for 8 years but have been really looking at the LEICA M system specifically the M10 over the last year. However I've stopped myself due to the fact that I also shoot a lot with off camera flash. Any experience with off camera flash with the m system?
Thank you! Only with the film M system- In which case it works great, as long as the low sync speed isn't a problem for you
Great video. - I couldn't be happier with my M6 as an everyday documentary style camera that I hope to keep for the long haul. Would love to pick up a used digital M at some point to supplement the M6 for those times where film isn't the most ideal.
Sharing lenses between them is an attractive prospect!
I happen to shoot M digital alongside film, practically i save some bucks on the high performance lense, but i agree very much with you. Despite being the most versatile M can do any type of shooting there’s always a better alternative
But for simplicity, nothing beats the M system
Agreed :-)
Thanks for starting this conversation. I have a question about frame lines. Can you do a video showing frame lines, as seen through the viewfinder, the way they look and how they are used ?
I have found very little videos showing actual frame lines and explaining the way different lenses are used with them. I noticed that some lenses actually protrude into the viewing area and some lenses like a 40mm may not show up correctly because there are no frame lines for that in between size. How do you work with that? As far as a small compact all manual system I was thinking of Leica or Nikon FM2/FM2a. I already have a Nikon F100 but it’s not exactly compact.
Thanks for your videos.
FW
Thanks for watching. I'll add that to the list! Although, it's a difficult thing to portray through video/images without using a tiny wide lens from a phone, etc... and distorting the actual perceived view. It's one of those things which is much better trialled in-person. In the mean time, I would suggest searching for websites/illustrations of the frame lines as shown in the Leica manuals, to give you a rough idea. And you are correct in that lenses like 40mm don't tend to have frame-lines on most cameras (people just estimate or extrapolate using the 35/50 lines etc). FM2 is a great camera, but a completely different shooting style to Leica (not to mention price point) If you're not too fussed about the rangefinder experience and M-mount lenses, I would easily suggest going with the Nikon. And then, maybe try and play around with a Leica later to see if you like it before committing. I definitely wouldn't have bought my first one (M4) if I hadn't used a friend's first.
Thanks for attempting it if you decide to do it. I don’t know how easy or difficult it is to use different lenses and focusing.
Thanks again
FW
Film was all there was when I got my 1st camera for Xmas in 1959 (a Brownie Six-20) and kept that way until I got my 1st DSLR in 2009. Probably, if I were your age, I would look at film as something akin to fencing or front loading rifles, and expensive hobby for hipsters. As things were for me, when I got really, really hooked in photography (in college by then) one of the first things I discovered was that I would need to do my own darkroom work if I wanted to pursue my (by then) passion. My father had a Leica IIIf with an Elmar 5cm f3.5 and he reluctantly lent it to me from time to time, and I learned to hate it; thus I worked my a** off to get me a Spotmatic with a 50/1.4 (they came as kits in 1967). Not much time after I saved enough for a stowaway Durst M300 that let me use the bathroom in my boarding house to print the roll *(not enough $ for rolls)* developed in Rodinal 1:50 the night before. A foldable table would go in the shower with the trays and a large bucket as holding wash.
After grad, I could migrate to Nikon and eventually an FM2n (of which I own now 3, including a "Year of the Dragon"). My first Leica came to my hands when my father died and (of course) nobody wanted it. I had it repaired, CLA'ed and started shooting it more by nostalgia than anything else; then the opportunity of an M6 within my reach appeared and that was it. It blew the lust for the 4x5 field camera, or the medium format. Forgot completely the 35mm SLR's except for the occasional macro or diving with a housed AF. Since 1968 I started learning the fine art of the darkroom, color and B&W until the digital hecatombe came. By then I had a full frame DSLR and knew that RA4 was dead, Epson was giving me much better color than I ever could get under the enlarger.
B&W however was something else. At the time B&W printers were incapable of replicating a fine FB chemical print. Bronzing and metamerism were insulting. I kept in my darkroom until 2016, sometimes creating digital contact negs to print on fiber base paper that would later be toned in selenium.
Ilford to the rescue! Their baryta paper line let me make prints virtually indistinguishable from the real thing. Then and there was when I started looking for a digital Leica to supplement my IIIf, M2, M6 and MP. Prices, as you know were out of this world. However I managed to make a pile of analog gear I wasn't using, sold it and got me an M10.
This very day, with my M2 on the way to DAG for a repair of the film advance system, I don't miss it. The M10 gets me the best color available. OTOH, for B&W, I have the sweet MP, and for macro I've got the FM2's or can pot one on the M10 with an adapter and focus with the Visoflex. I'll be 76 in 20 days. 😄
I’ve often been close on buying a Leica partly for the rangefinder experience and partly vanity :) but I am mainly digital since 2004 and my sometime film shooting is for fun and for that I have a lovely Pentax Limited primes 31mm F1.8 and 43mm F1.9 and 77mm F1.8 and a beautiful 40yo Pentax MX that the light meter failed so rather than get it fixed I use a Sekonic light meter. Slows the process but with exposure latitude I can guess pretty close once I’ve got a street location zoned in. This a small camera, huge viewfinder and small lenses so it’s discrete and easy to carry. When I shoot this I know I don’t need a Leica but maybe one day when I retire I might indulge myself and get one for a bit of vainglorious fun :)
As much as I yearn for a Leica M System, it is something that is not practical for me personally, at present.. Sometimes you have to let your head rule your heart. Great Video as usual Hashem
Thanks!
Awesome video, thanks for making it!
I don't mind rangefinder cameras, I grew up with them. But the problem with Leica is that it somehow, in a weird way, they don't have any real competition. Or the hype is simply so large. What drives prices thru the roof. Too expensive for me, sorry, even if I'd really need it.
So when using film, I'll still happily snap my Oly OM1 which my daughter bought me for my last birthday. Or my dad's Minolta srT303b...
For everything else, my Canons and Fujis will do the job.
Been shooting film SLRs for about 20 years now and I never really considered a leica or any range finder until very recently just as a means to introduce something new and different into my photography. I’m not a professional I mostly just shoot to document my life like family/travel photos. I enjoy the film experience a lot more than digital. I’m also a fan of mechanical /automatic watches so that mentality definitely adds to the desire for a leica. I’ve been very torn on which model to get. But I think I have to just bite the bullet and get an M6. I find myself heavily dependent on a light meter mod of the time and also the m6 currently on sale locally seems to be mint with a recent CLA and I don’t trust eBay listings so yeah. Might hurt a bit financially at the start but this is a buy it for life camera.
I hope to eventually reduce my photography gear down to maybe 1 leica and 2 lenses. But I do enjoy medium format a lot and I might still love my Nikon SLRs for other situations. We’ll see.
I love my Leica M6. It's the camera that finally made me fall in love with rangefinders after trying a lot of cheaper RFs. However, you've hit it on the head that it's not for everyone or every scenario. Also not everyone can afford it and even if they can, it may not be the best camera for them.
Well said Don!
Did you use Bessa camera or Zeiss Ikon?
Spot on. The Leica is a beautiful camera excellent for what it is designed for however I would argue that a SLR is more versatile and if I could only have one camera… well, I don’t know, I’d probably still want the Leica with its limitations 😊.
We're spoilt for so many good options these days!
Great vid. I have a question for you. Do you have a recommendation / idea on where the get an m film body cla’d?
Hey, I think I replied to your duplicate question about this by email 👍
For me, the only reason I would use a Leica M camera would be to benefit from the very high image quality. Of the rangefinder cameras, Leica's M's have the best rangefinder focus aids. I have tried the Bessa's and Nikon RF cameras and I don't like the slow focus methods. This is why I went with the Nikon F's as my primary camera instead of rangefinder cameras. That and the versatility of compatibility with long lenses.
Great video
Thanks!
What do you recommend for portrait photography? Thanks.
My favourite camera for portraits is probably the Pentax 645N (or maybe Pentax 67). For the 35mm, the Nikon F2 or FE lately
The all rounder vs the street camera
The all rounder can also do those things
I think its comes down to preference and are you willing to commit to learning zone focusing, Rf experience
If a leica is out of your league , voigtlander bessa are good alternatives , relatively affordable for a body.
Love the photographs shown.
Thanks!
I have 2 M cameras, a Konica S2 and a Canon G3 QL17. Lol, but seriously, both get great results and I had hundreds of dollars left for film and printing!!!!
I have M10 and APO 50 F2. So these 2 helps in making money ? Also I have summilux 1.4
Leicas are nice I love the life style but digital medium format getting cheaper and smaller make more sense for full frame user to move up the chain
Truth be told you are right - "no one needs a Leica for film photography" , but for me a better question would be, "do you really want a Leica" - Given all the available, and affordable alternatives, that can perform as good if not better in most cases if you're going to be shooting film. But for those few - the heart wants that thing, that the heart wants, even if it is a Leica film camera.
Love Daniel's channel as well; great recco. I so envy that he lives in New Mexico as well :P
Always insightful stuff, I've listened to him in quite a few podcast interviews as well which are great.
What is the make and model of the watch that you are wearing? Tissot Powermatic?
Visodate :-)
The age old "Do you really need...." dilemma hehe. Yeh, i can safely say i don't really need 2/3s of what i currently have, or at least not really ;) I can justify most of what i have though in some way and i do really use most of it and love most of what i have kept :) But the way to getting to this point has been littered with cameras and lenses that i most certainly did not need and in the end did not get much use either. To your point my first leica was a leica Q, and by that time i had not got back into film again.
But for me that was a dream camera in many ways. I know that one is a little different because of its AF, but the feel of the camera was the same as any great leica and got me into both film leica's and other Digital Leica bodies.
My first analog leica was the M4 too. And like you i just wanted one more than maybe needed one at first. Such a nice camera. But in reality i used my Nikon FE2 and FM3a a lot more. So that made me sell the M4 in the end. And i thus far have not got another film leica even though i still from time to time lust for a M4 or M2 or M3 at some point :)
My M240 now fill the "need" as a reportage camera. I take it a little bit of everywhere with a 28 or 50 attached and it makes for a great companion :) But like you say it certainly is not for everyone and it takes patience to get good pictures out of it. Great vid Hashem, stay safe. /Martin the swede.
What is that Nikon Model you have there?
Thinking of an M11 or M10R, want an all around travel and doc camera. Does this apply? Q3 could also be another option soon. How do you nail focus every time?
Both are great options. The Q maybe better value and versatility, if you don't need to change lenses. I don't nail focus every time!
Question how well would a m11 work for as far a cosplay photographer I got to cosplay events all the time
Spending the money on a film leica just to shoot cars, houses and landscapes never made sense to me.
Mailboxes are where it's at
@@pushingfilm gas stations at night on cinestill?
So much gear buying is the romance of it, but it won’t get you out there shooting more; it may even do the opposite because there’s no money left for other photo necessities. Hitting the street with a $$$ camera is daunting. I’d rather use something for which I have a spare or can afford to replace.
That's true!
I went all-in on a new Leica M system back in 2000. I had no interest in telling others what I had spent for my M6 and trio of Summicron lenses, and it never came up as no one else was interested. It looked like a nice old camera and the name Leica meant nothing to anyone else that I knew back then. 22 years later, this gear would sell for more than double what I paid when new. Though it is good gear, I believe today's values have more to do with Leica reinventing itself as a lifestyle brand than anything else.
Great video. I was lucky enough to get to test a Leica M9P quite a few years go. I went into testing it (for a review) wondering who would want a camera that expensive? 2 weeks later I'd placed an order.
While I wish today that I'd gotten a film M body instead of the digital (as the sensor broke and can't be repaired) I can definitely see why people want them - not just for the prestige but because there's something about shooting with one that slows you down, makes you appreciate the machinery in your hands and the scene in your viewfinder and that gives you quite superb optics and potentially beautiful images.
As I now have a couple of lenses but no Leica body I'm on the hunt for my next one (film this time).
Hey Darren, that's so unfortunate! I remember working at Michaels in the Service department years ago when Leica was still replacing those faulty corroded sensors, many of them came back. Hopefully, you can get your hands on a good film body and start using those lenses again!
@@pushingfilm btw - I wondered where I knew you for. I'm almost certain I've met you at Michaels?
@@DarrenRowse it's likely! I was there for a few years 😁
What's the difference between Nikon and Leica lenses in terms of final result?
Totally agree on Daniel. All his videos are gold mines, but might leave you discouraged about doing random street photography. None the less, it is a good kick in the but to forget about instagram trends and be more ambitious.
Did you ever consider a digital Leica? I remember you had a stint with the X-PRO3, are you still using that?
I find it a bit more difficult to get excited about the digital process, not because it is digital, but mostly because I feel like it provides too many options in the way of post editing.
I have! but they're out of my budget, and if I had to choose one I go with the film M... I did try the X-Pro3! It was a loaner from Fujifilm though, so I only had it for a few weeks. I would be happy with that as a digital alternative for my street photography, and might even get an X100V since I mainly use 35mm on the street. I get what you mean about the process though, it's not quite the same!
@@pushingfilm Definitely. I recently bought an M10-R, and although it was nice, it was not $10.000 nice, so I returned it after 1 week. I tend to shoot digital in a similar way I'd shoot slide film (haven't yet found a replacement for color negative or BW).
Although $10.000 is only 400 rolls of E100, mentally it's a tough pill to swallow. My M9 will have to do for the time being (It does a good job, just even slower than a film camera)
Well for what its worth, if you want to buy a Leica without dropping a large amount of your savings on an M body, perhaps consider the R series SLR's instead. I know it wont be the same as owning a M body, but it wont break the bank. on the other hand, you wont have the advantages of using the rangefinder for fast street photography as Hasham mentioned, so it would be a compromise. I love my R5 and R8 Leicas, they're beautiful to use, and will keep me happy to I can maybe get an M series Leica one day.
I have OM system with many lenses, and I also buy other cameras now and then, but I haven´t seen why (beyond size and portability) I should buy a Leica yet other than FOMO
Agree - love my OM1. Small, price is nice, quality is excellent.
Love the OM cameras, they're rally quite compact for SLRS. Haha yeah, Fomo is a powerful thing with many people!
I am a huge OM fan and my first camera ever was a new OMF my Dad bought me in High School and you are right about it. But for me, a rangefinder (note, I didn’t say a Leica) reduces distractions to someone who knows what they are going to get for certain types of photography.
Ease of focus, and trustworthy speed to focus are two other elements where I love a rangefinder over an SLR, even my beloved OM’s.
This is the best camera possible if you’re doing a trip around Europe, just be careful to not get mugged while in the act.
Yep!
6:28 this one is mind-blowing
Thanks!
With crime raging out of control, I would not be inclined to risk the Leica investment on the street of any city. I have owned and enjoyed using an M3 with Summicron 50/2, but now favor a Nicca, Canon, Nikon rangefinders, with similar experience.
Definitely agree Daniel Milnor is awesome!
Having a Leica M5 and a Canon model 7, I see no difference in quality and usability. Only the price is very different.
quite honestly, I absolutely agree with everything you said. Last year, I got a BP MP on my birthday (bday gift to myself haha), and it's a fantastic camera. BUT, I sold one of my favourite cameras to get it (it's in the Nikon line, but I don't want to say what it is because the prices keep going up). The camera I sold... I think about it almost daily. It was a dream of a camera; buttery smooth, amazing lenses... I'll probably re-purchase it eventually, because to me it was the pinnacle of the SLR. What I'm trying to say, however, is this: after purchasing my White Whale camera (the MP), I'm not quite sure it was worth the hype. It's absolutely incredible for street photography (silent shutters are beautiful), but for shooting more than street, I think I might actually prefer the SLR. For now, I'll be shooting my Minolta XD-11 for all those other things (another sleeper hit, IMO, and was developed alongside Leica), but I guess it just goes to show: sometimes, the thing you pine after the most isn't always the best thing.
That sense of trial and error is all part of the journey hey! If I used SLR more for my film/personal work than I did a rangefinder, I would similarly get my "white whale" upgrade to the Nikon FE, being the FM3a 😅
@@pushingfilm SHHHH!!! Dont mention the camera!! It will be worth too much too soon! hahaha
@@StuartWeir haha I feel like it already is 🥲
Wow great timing for this video. Did you see my discussion video I had with Ulysses on this too? Sorry shameless plug but on my channel with my M10 review series I am discussing exactly every point you made! It's like we are unsurprisingly of the same mindset because we've both had the system for long enough to use it and see it's pros and cons. So glad to have another voice right now and others are finally saying whats need to be said about the system. It's ideal for a certain type of photographer who takes photographs in a particular manner. It's not for everyone and often shouldn't be treated as this luxury item that often people unfamiliar with the system associate it as. Cheers for the great work. Your photography reflects exactly the mindset that makes this system specifically useful. 👍
Agreed! (I think we went over some of this stuff in our little Instagram exchange :-D) But I noticed through your videos that it's a polarising and even triggering thing for some people! Even though at the end of the day, its just about having fun and being creative through photography, right? But also, I think if some people want to treat it mainly as a luxury item and/or collect them (as people might do with certain cars and other things) then that's fine too! My concern is more with the misunderstanding of it's prowess as the ultimate tool or "grail camera" for photography with some newcomers, which it certainly isn't (for most)
Thanks for the opinion video :) i love leica system for sure…
I'll never put so much money just for the hype. It's like owning a Rolex when any watch or phone gives you the right time. Of course, street photographers can benefit of this system but you can do the job with any other one. In my opinion, in the first place, it's a question of magical belief that you'll get Henri Cartier-Bresson's talent, or telling to everyone how much you're wealthy.
Very valuable.Thanks
Glad you thought so, thanks for watching!
Phew, no blood boiling here and thanks for saying I don't need one... ;)
The one time I didn't cause you to spend money...
I love my Leica M and I would never recommend it for anyone. The ones who buy it know what they’re doing. They wouldn’t ask about it.
Trading in and buying something useful? Like a Fuji X100?
Is the Sony A7RV better than Leica M11?
My opinion on a pure performance stand point there's no reason to choose a lieca over say a Nikon f 1,2,3,4 are 5 those camera are just better a faster an more reliable . Buy a lieca for what it's is nothing more an if you like luxury items let's keep it 💯
Nikon F's are the best all-rounder option in my opinion! especially when you consider value, lens range, and reliability.
@@pushingfilm ikr just picked up a like new f5 ...wow 😲 like a modern dslr that shoots film
Interesting video but my biggest surprise is that very little is said about the end result : the quality of the photos you get out of that camera ? We do photography to enjoy pictures and I would love to know how many of us non professional users could make a true difference between a Leica-Zeiss combination with cheaper alternatives.
Shooting experience is important but what about being able to get a just as good picture for a fraction of the price? If you are rich enough to afford it and are vanity minded ok do it but if you are more interested in end result and need to be careful on amount of money spent there has to be just as good options. Even small weight and size is not limited to Leica cameras.
Of course I’m not even mentioning the film vs digital debate and prime vs zoom lenses. I have done both over nearly 50 years of photographing and would never go back to film.
Function or performance-wise of course a Leica M would not be able to justify its price. But those are not the only considerations, luxuriousness, history, feel, design, aesthetic, lens options, handling, range finder shooting styles etc all could be a considering factor and it really just depends on who you are and what you need. Also, don’t always look at things from your own perspective, we should think about WHY Leica priced their items so high, there is actually a history to this: back in the 90s Leica as a company/brand was about to bankrupt and close down due to Canon and Nikon’s dominance in the entire camera market, in order to save Leica, its brilliant CEO/Board had decided to change the brand’s position in the market by re-positioning it as a luxurious item, similar to Hermes. This new business direction has successfully bring leica back to life, and hence the high price of Leica and Hermes as we know of today. All these brands started off as humble, functional brands but gradually as the brand’s reputation develops, it allows them to re-position their place in the market.
My opinion is that I can probably never afford one lol.
If you sold all your other gear.... 😅
using a Leica M is not only for a perfect result, it’s also a amazing joy to make photos with a Leica M.
Legit question - WHY do people prefer that experience for reportage/street/documentary work? Specifically.
There are a lot of other lenses that allow zone focusing. Even in the digital world, there are cameras that can be pre-set for exposure. There are many that handle just as fast even for all-manual. There are other designs with a rangefinder-ish focusing prism. There are several different types of TTL meters, and a lot of modern mirrorless cameras let you turn off the information displays if you don't want them.
"I wanted one and could afford it" is 100% completely satisfactory for why someone would buy a Leica (or anything else, really). But, for me it comes down to TTL composition being the reason I've never really looked into one. Literally every other thing seems like a wash.
Wrong question. Why being rich? To get a Leica.
I'm sorry guys, but despite the mechanics of these cameras being top notch and that they lend themselves to certain types of photography, they are still overpriced status symbols. And, most of the people that own them are those that earn more in a month than most of us would earn in 5-10 years. Don't get me wrong, they're great cameras, but why would I pay upwards of $3000 and considerably more for a 2nd hand (or new) camera that I can get the same quality of photo out of something where I'd pay half as much or less. Then, there's the lenses. You can buy a good car for the price of many Leica setups. In any case, with my own photography, a Leica would be just dross and most certainly wouldn't be the right camera for the job. It'd be like going down the road to buy a bottle of milk in a Bugatti or Ferrari, when all I needed was a pushy. All you're really paying for is the "red dot" and the name. Any of the higher end Nikon or Canon rangefinders will give you the same experience for quite a bit less, even though they can still be expensive in themselves (depending on where you buy them). There are plenty of alternatives that will give you the same rangefinder experience and get you fantastic pics. And, for those genres of photography where Leica doesn't really cut the mustard, there are plenty of other cameras to choose from.