DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

User comments btil June 2003

One body that functions the way YOU want it to is worth TEN bodies that don't.

It's rather ridiculous for a photographer to have the (old) 'Leica Way' imposed upon him by those so resistant to change. 'Evolve' if you wanna.
 
> I second that, if you think that your pictures would benefit from spontaneity of AE then it is worth trading up. If you take time over your shots, then probably not.

I surprised myself with the proportion of time I have my M7 in Auto mode. I love it.

SG
 
Andrea,

according to different sources, Leica achieved to eliminate the flare problem well known in all M-Leicas with the new Leica MP.

I would therefore not sell any Leica til you can be sure that you can have also your future M7 with this newer viewfinder. Anything else is in my view not acceptable.

The flare problem is one of the major reasons why I am not using my M6 anymore.

Dirk
 
I agree. When I was in college earning my BFA in photography I used my 1973 Nikon f1.4 and still love this camera. I've been a journalistic wedding photographer since 1993 using Canon USM 17-35 and 28-70 lenses. These are HUGE pieces of glass to haul around and I've found that while I'm being "inconspicuous" while working for people who have paid me to be there, the Canons with the huge glass works really well. However, my trusty Nikon still gives me much more image sharpness than the Canon can dream of doing. Also, I do images of cafe scenes where the few times I've hauled out the Canon, of course everyone in the place gets that "deer in the headlights look" directly at me and soon the room empties and of course those who stay are somewhat uncomfortable. Recently I did the same with the Nikon and had better results from the subjects, that is until they heard that really loud slap of the mirror moving out of the way. I really look forward to Leica for these situations.

My photo prof. in art school used an M2 and probably still does. Several times in the past 20 some years someone wonderful soul has tried to get me to go into Leica and when in art school, I didn't understand, I couldn't "see" well enough to give it a go and was stubborn enough to not really pay attention. As a professional, a trusted friend again tried to steer me toward the Leica system instead of Canon. Finally, I'm getting into Leica and should have all those years ago. There will probably be times in every job where I will have to use the Canon, for the speed it offers compared to the Leica, however, with age, experience, sharpening of the eye-the ability to "see" and trusting my judgment to capture THE moment I look forward to life with Leica as my main camera system on the job and for my own enjoyment.

While you are young, and you seem to understand, at least intuitively, the benefits and quality of Leica AND you actually have the money to buy Leica I'd have to say "Go for it." There will come a time in the not so far off future when with the increase of having to earn a living and a possible family to support, that you more likely than not will not have the $ to buy Leica. Take it from someone who doesn't quite have the $ to buy into the Leica system who speaks from over 25 years of experience. Go with the Leica, and compare the image quality with what your friends are using. You might even cause them to change sides to Leica.

I hope you are enjoying your photography class. Which school do you attend? Cathy in Atlanta
 
>> Posted by S. W. Lee on Thursday, March 06, 2003 - 6:26 am: > > Hi, i'm a college student falling in love with photography. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Always remember that cameras are TOOLS. A rangefinder camera has advantages for certain kinds of work. It excells for low light levels, small size and quietness. It is much more accurate in some situations, but not all, when using wide angle lenses.

Do your homework first and then carefully consider how qualified those who are giving "advice" really are.

There are now several good 35 mm. rangefinder cameras available and a few excellent ones. This is a much different situation than ten years ago. If possible, take time to look at the several choices in a store, or better still, if a friend has one, try his. I have Leica Ms. For me, in 1968, they were the only intelligent choice. Now you have more options. Consider your real needs rather than emotional factors.

For what you are planning, you might not even need interchangable lenses. If so, there are a few very good, and inexpensive, choices also available to you.
 
> >>>>>>>>I've been using a canon rebel for a year now, I do mostly black and white > street photography, and still-life. My rebel is ok but what I really need > is a quick, inconspicous, quiet camera with great image quality. Try the M-series and see if the manual focus RFDR is quick enough for you, compared to AF. The M's are nice as they do not have the time lag as do many SLR's, esp. AF. The M's are inconspicuous (black), quiet and image quality is great.

>>>>>>>> Leica M's are a waste of money. After examining an M Leica, you can decide whether the fit, finish, makes it worth the money. If worth is measured as a box that can accept lenses, then any 35 SLR will do. However, if you enjoy what the Leica is, that makes it worth the $$$.

>>>>>>>>> but getting scared of the commitment.I'm just worried about spending too much money on a > camera i might not even know how to use. Commitment? You can sell the Leica and not lose a lot (if you buy used). If you understand manual operation (f/stop and shutter speeds), you'll know how to use it. I use 35 SLR's, and 645. When I need a 24mm, or a zoom, a longer than 135mm, or closeups, I'll take the 35 SLR. When I have the time to use it, I will use 645. In almost every other situation, I will grab my Leica M6, 50 2.8 Elmar, and 135 4.5 Hektor. I enjoy using the M6, and I seem to compose quicker and get more usable photos. For ex&le, I haven't got lots of good pictures with wildlife where you cannot anticipate the action (spawning salmon, whales, etc.) But with a RFDR, you see outside the image area.

Best wishes.
 
SW,
May I recommend a used Hexar RF with it's back focus fixed by Konica NJ! This will only set you back about $700. Then you can buy a whole slew of Leica glass to go with this setup. What do you compromise, you need batteries (and a spare set), it's slightly (emphasis on slightly) noiser than a M camera (I also have a M4-P), the view finder is wide ie ~0.6 mag vs my M4-P mag of 0.72 otherwise it's a no brainer. The camera is well made, has a higher shutter speed 1/4000 vs 1/1000 (usefull for wide open shots at F2.0 in the sun with ASA 100 film), has a good light meter (just don't disconnect your brain), have fun.

Gerry
 
I never said that she shouldn't move to an M7 is she wants AE. She wants it fine, I'm jst saying that turning in 2 working bodies for 1 is a very steep price to pay for her M7. Don't do that, find an other way to finance it.
 
Dirk is correct. The flare was the only reason I got rid of my M6TTL. Just couldn't work with it. If they have now fixed it I'll take an M7 with the improved VF and otherwise will settle for a MP.
 
Back
Top