Leica’s New Camera Puts Skill Back Into Focus
Sep 19, 2023 16:32:40 #
Sep 19, 2023 21:29:25 #
The Leica M, film or digital doesn't require any more skill than other cameras. Perhaps for the film version the most difficult is to load the camera. Focusing and setting exposure are extremely simple tasks.
Sep 19, 2023 21:54:47 #
BebuLamar wrote:
The Leica M, film or digital doesn't require any more skill than other cameras. Perhaps for the film version the most difficult is to load the camera. Focusing and setting exposure are extremely simple tasks.
Simplicity and complexity isn’t the point of the article. The point is the difference between photographer involvement in the decision making process vs algorithms making the decisions. For me, making exposure and focus decisions is part of my photography enjoyment. That is what the article was about. Extremely simple tasks? I doubt that anybody who has never shot ME and MF would find it simple.
Sep 20, 2023 06:23:31 #
Sep 20, 2023 09:35:04 #
This is only my personal opinion. Just recently I participated on a thread about Leica. In that occasion I said that Leica cameras are quality made along with the lenses. I also said they sold the AF technology to Minolta that improved it to be used at the time, around 1985. Polaroid and Konica had AF cameras at the time but they were not sLR film cameras.
I have always sustained that I can do with a Nikon lens what I could do with a Leica and I have seen trillions of shots made with Leica cameras and lenses. Olympus has me in awe with their cameras and lenses. Pro lenses by Olympus are among the best optics I have ever used.
The new Leica is intended for photographers who want to shoot like in the old times again. Do we need a sophisticated and expensive camera to shoot in manual mode using manual focus lenses or AF lenses in manual mode? I do not think so. Technology is making our job easier and computerized photography is doing the same thing. I have nothing against using a manual camera with manual lenses but I can certainly say that the photographer doing so will miss a lot of opportunities unless shooting landscapes or non moving subjects.
I said also I have never been a Leica fan. In the 50's it was not difficult to identify a photograph as made by a Leica lens but not so today. I can say the same of Nikon, in the early 60's it was not that difficult to identify an image as made with a Nikon lens but today that does not hold true. Even independent lens makers are making exceptionally good optics and professionals, that kept away from those lenses in the past are using them today. Some of the Leica lenses are made in Japan with Japanese glass by Panasonic. Portugal and Canada, as I know, have made Leica bodies. Minolta once had a joint venture with Leica. Because of their excessive prices it is not that easy to see a professional using Leica. Sebastiao Salgado is using Canon today. It is not the camera, it is the photographer.
I will never buy a Leica but that is me. I have been perfectly happy since 1963 when I bought a Nikon F adding Nikon optics over the years as I could afford them. My main Nikon cameras today are digital but I still keep and periodically use my Nikon F-100 and the Nikon F of 1963. I mentioned in that thread that it was David Douglas Duncan who actually introduced Nikon to America when he bought Nikon optics in Japan to shoot the Korean War. In 1957 Nikon introduced the Nikon SP, a pretty advanced rangefinder camera at the time with an innovative viewfinder adaptable to a few focal lengths. That camera was used by many professionals been well made and cheaper than a Leica. No, it was not better made than a Leica but it was a durable superb tool in the hands of a professional. When in 1959 Nikon introduced the Nikon F it was well accepted by photographers all over the world and the rest is history.
I have always sustained that I can do with a Nikon lens what I could do with a Leica and I have seen trillions of shots made with Leica cameras and lenses. Olympus has me in awe with their cameras and lenses. Pro lenses by Olympus are among the best optics I have ever used.
The new Leica is intended for photographers who want to shoot like in the old times again. Do we need a sophisticated and expensive camera to shoot in manual mode using manual focus lenses or AF lenses in manual mode? I do not think so. Technology is making our job easier and computerized photography is doing the same thing. I have nothing against using a manual camera with manual lenses but I can certainly say that the photographer doing so will miss a lot of opportunities unless shooting landscapes or non moving subjects.
I said also I have never been a Leica fan. In the 50's it was not difficult to identify a photograph as made by a Leica lens but not so today. I can say the same of Nikon, in the early 60's it was not that difficult to identify an image as made with a Nikon lens but today that does not hold true. Even independent lens makers are making exceptionally good optics and professionals, that kept away from those lenses in the past are using them today. Some of the Leica lenses are made in Japan with Japanese glass by Panasonic. Portugal and Canada, as I know, have made Leica bodies. Minolta once had a joint venture with Leica. Because of their excessive prices it is not that easy to see a professional using Leica. Sebastiao Salgado is using Canon today. It is not the camera, it is the photographer.
I will never buy a Leica but that is me. I have been perfectly happy since 1963 when I bought a Nikon F adding Nikon optics over the years as I could afford them. My main Nikon cameras today are digital but I still keep and periodically use my Nikon F-100 and the Nikon F of 1963. I mentioned in that thread that it was David Douglas Duncan who actually introduced Nikon to America when he bought Nikon optics in Japan to shoot the Korean War. In 1957 Nikon introduced the Nikon SP, a pretty advanced rangefinder camera at the time with an innovative viewfinder adaptable to a few focal lengths. That camera was used by many professionals been well made and cheaper than a Leica. No, it was not better made than a Leica but it was a durable superb tool in the hands of a professional. When in 1959 Nikon introduced the Nikon F it was well accepted by photographers all over the world and the rest is history.
Sep 20, 2023 10:03:15 #
I love these conversations where the talk is about what we like and why and not the “My camera is better than your camera” variety.
Sep 20, 2023 10:03:32 #
Sep 20, 2023 11:05:48 #
I don't think I will take any better pictures with a Leica and no it doesn't make me more skillful but with that said if I am going to buy another camera I think the Leica makes the most sense. The Leica is very enjoyable to use and it's very well built (not tough but well built) and certainly not built like a tank.
Oct 3, 2023 00:35:33 #
BandeauRouge
Loc: usa
the leica family is to over priced,,, there are a few really old examples on ebay, pre ww2 that are actually affordable as is, the russian knock offs arent that to hard to afford. But new ones,... NOPE.
Oct 3, 2023 20:50:26 #
Oct 3, 2023 20:55:54 #
Canisdirus wrote:
Leica isn't about taking images.
Leica is about being seen with a Leica.
Leica is about being seen with a Leica.
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Oct 3, 2023 21:51:43 #
Mac wrote:
Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Hardly...I can certainly afford most of the newer models and lenses.
I like options for my coin.
Same reasons I never bought a Rolex.
Oct 3, 2023 22:28:13 #
Canisdirus wrote:
Hardly...I can certainly afford most of the newer models and lenses.
I like options for my coin.
Same reasons I never bought a Rolex.
I like options for my coin.
Same reasons I never bought a Rolex.
Hmmm. Ok, if you say so. But it seems to me that if it was just that you were not interested in Leica you wouldn’t have felt the need to make a derogatory comment.
Oct 3, 2023 22:43:50 #
Mac wrote:
Hmmm. Ok, if you say so. But it seems to me that if it was just that you were not interested in Leica you wouldn’t have felt the need to make a derogatory comment.
If the shoe fits...and statistically...it does.
A lot of folks in my circle shoot Leica...but really they just want to be seen with them.
New model comes along...they instantly dump their 'almost new' model.
It's not about photography...not since the film era.
Oct 7, 2023 00:03:07 #
BandeauRouge
Loc: usa
Canisdirus wrote:
If the shoe fits...and statistically...it does.
A lot of folks in my circle shoot Leica...but really they just want to be seen with them.
New model comes along...they instantly dump their 'almost new' model.
It's not about photography...not since the film era.
A lot of folks in my circle shoot Leica...but really they just want to be seen with them.
New model comes along...they instantly dump their 'almost new' model.
It's not about photography...not since the film era.
and they always be like selfish )(*^%$ the NEVER let you have the old almost new camera they replace.
But seriously, it isnt about photography anymore. its not even about SKILL anymore. And its certainly NOT about having the ability to create an image with a camera.
For example, there are some interesting photoshop how to videos online that show you how to take a photo of a man in a chair, a park bench, and a suit, and put the man into the suit, and then have him sititng on the park bench.. all from the luxury of sittin on your butt using photo shop..
In the day sof SKILL, or at least thinking... a photographer had to put the guy into a suit, and then put him onto a park bench.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.