Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have never been a Leica fan. In the 50's when I saw a Leica image I could immediately identify it as made with a Leica, not so today. Nobody will deny the quality of Leica bodies and lenses and in regard to price many cameras today which are made in Japan are as expensive as Leica cameras.
I have been using Nikon cameras and lenses since 1963 and I have been very pleased with Nikon. I have and use an old, circa 1974, 50mm f1.4 lens that I am sure cannot compete with a Summicron of the same age in built quality but the lens has shined for me and produces images of exceptional quality and I can say the same of the many other 50mm lenses like the f2 and f1.8. Those lenses are super sharp but since I do not use Leica lenses I cannot compare the quality among them. They do their job is all I can say and they do it well.

The "Leica look" is something that seems to affect the eyes of Leica users. I have seen trillions of images made with Leica lenses but they do not look that different to the images made with similar lenses of other brands but especially Nikon lenses. Olympus is a well know and respected company. They have manufactured excellent optics at a fraction of the price of Leica and the quality has been there. I have been entirely satisfied with my Olympus and Panasonic lenses and we all know Panasonic has been manufacturing lenses for Leica in Japan for several years already. Today's cameras have lots of technology built in and achieving 40 or 60 megapixels images is common, even when using computerized techniques. The quality of those images is excellent.

Sebastiao Salgado is a famous Leica photographer from Brazil who has used Leicas exclusively. As of lately he has been using Canon cameras. I know professional Leica photographers who now use Nikon. The prices of cameras and lenses have been going up and today it is not rare to buy a Nikon for $6000 so when it comes to price the difference is not that significant. Still many photographers prefer to invest in Leica, which keeps a high retail price in the used market much better than other cameras. Leica cameras and lenses are meticulously very well made and they will last for a long time. My Nikon F of 1963 is still going as strong as it did that year and it never has seen a technician for repairs or adjustments. For reasons unknown to me Leica did not implement AF with their cameras for years while other manufacturers kept on refining their AF cameras. Rangefinder cameras are not for me but I can understand those cameras are favored by others. AF today is fast and precise. It has no rival when it comes to wildlife, sports and action photography.

I have been perfectly happy with my Olympus and Nikon cameras.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Thank you for taking the time for such a well considered reply.

Being happy with your gear is the most important thing. My first SLR was an Olympus OM-1 film camera, my first DSLR was a Nikon D90. There is nothing wrong with Auto Exposure or Auto Focus, but for me, using Manual Exposure and Manual Focus makes me feel more involved in the process. The switch to using Manual Exposure was simple and easy, but AF lenses are marginal at best for MF. I bought a number of Nikkor and Voigtlander MF lenses to use on my Nikon Df which I really enjoyed using. I also like Rangefinder Focusing to go along Zone Focusing on my M11. But that’s me.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

When I visited Japan in the early 70's the Olympus OM-1 film camera was well regarded by Japanese photographers. The lenses were as good then as they are now although the new lenses have new optical technologies that make them better. During the Korean War David Douglas Duncan was assigned to shoot in the battlefield. During his stay in Tokyo he met a young Japanese photographer working for Life, his name was Jun Mikki. Jun was shooting a camera fitted with lenses made by a Japanese company called then Nippon Kogaku, later on it became Nikon. Mr. Duncan was impressed with the quality of the images Mr. Mikki showed him made with the Japanese lenses. He bought two of them that fit his Leica and he shot many images of the war with those lenses. Life magazine published many of those images and it was when Mr. Duncan returned to the USA that they learned the images were not made with Leica lenses.

In the 50's Leica was king. The lenses made by Ernst Leitz had excellent optics but many of them lacked contrast when compared to Japanese lenses. When in 1957 Nikon introduced the Nikon SP rangefinder, a very well made camera, Life magazine switched to Nikon. The Leicas were better built but these new cameras were cheaper, tough and its viewfinder arquably one of the best at the time. The optics as to be expected were of excellent quality.

I never had an issue with the manual focus of my Nikon AF lenses when I have used them in manual. The electronic in focus dot in the viewfinder has been of great help to make sure the camera is in focus. I have never felt restricted with manual focus with my auto focus lenses but auto focus is so convenient that I use it most of the time.

I said I have never been a Leica fan and I also said I have never been restricted in any way using Nikon cameras and lenses. If you are happy using a Leica that is what matters. I bet those using Canon and Pentax also swear by their cameras.
It has been a pleasure exchanging comments in this thread.

twowindsbear

Are you a David Douglas Duncan fan? Check out his War Without Heroes, about the USMC's siege & battles at Khe Sahn during the Viet Nam war, and his book about the Democratic presidential convention in Chicago in 1968. Powerful photos!

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

What I dislike about using AF lenses for MF is the absence of distance and DoF scales. Some AF lenses have a small scale that is of limited usefulness. The focus dot is a great help, but I like looking at the lens and seeing all the information right there and being able to visualize the result of whatever changes I might make. I don’t make photos in search of financial gain or praise, but simply my own enjoyment and, for me, ME and MF is part of that enjoyment.

I did an internet search for Jun Mikki and didn’t find much. Tomorrow I’ll try again and for David Douglas Duncan. The history you provided was interesting and I want to learn more. (I’m a bit of a history buff)

It is good that users of the different brands swear by their brands, they should. Though some are chauvinistic about it which I sometimes find irritating.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Thank you for the information. I am not precisely what you could call a "David Douglas Duncan" fan although I admire him as a photojournalist. Yes, I have seen his images and they are awesome but who could expect less from him? He was impressed as I said when he saw images made with Nikon lenses and at the time Nikon was beginning to make cameras for the local market, especially USA servicemen. I am sure you know Japan was not allowed to manufacture arms at the time and Nikon has been heavily engaged in that during the war.

Life came to learn about Nikon lenses when Mr. Duncan returned to the USA, they have already published many of Mr. Duncan shots that they thought were shot with Leica lenses. I would dare to say that it was actually Mr. Duncan who opened up the doors for the future market in this country of Nikon cameras and lenses. Ernst Hass, another excellent photographer, also shot many of his photographs with Nikon cameras and lenses after spending most of his life shooting Leicas.
The rest is history.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Mac, do exactly what you like. I used to do that in the 50's and 60's.
Today, when I need to know exactly what will be in focus I press the depth of field preview button, it is more precise for me and more accurate than looking at a chart.

Jun Mikki died many years ago. He is still remembered and honored in Japan. I do not know if Nikon honors him but it was him who put Nikon on the map, precisely when Mr. Duncan visited Japan on his way to Korea. As I said, the 1957 Nikon SP was a revolutionary camera at the time. Many professional photographers all over the world used it. In 1959 Nikon introduced the Nikon F, another innovative camera that became highly popular and that I am sure you know had multiple modifications over the years in the same original body.

Twowindsbear has mentioned two books written by David Douglas Duncan, I do not know if Jun Mikki participated writing any books. I know his photography is often exhibited in Japan.

Hanson

Many Leitz lenses are well-known for lack of contrast. BUT that was pre 1950s history. Leica lenses are known for image contrast after 1960 and on.

Leica researched and developed AF technology well before any public knowledge. Because it was not deemed good enough up to Leica standard, it was not used on their camera models for many years. Then AF was developed and widely implemented by Japanese companies and succeeded. They led and won at the starting line. The rest is history.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If memory does not fail Konica and Polaroid had AF cameras prior to 1985 but they were not sLR cameras. When Leica sold its AF patent to Minolta the company developed the technology and in 1985 they introduced the Minolta Maxxum with AF. I do not know for sure if it was Minolta the first camera company to introduce AF what I know is I that soon after that all other camera companies followed. Why Leica after 20 years developing AF failed to implement it and Minolta did it in one year is beyond me. AF came to solve many problems encountered by photographers when shooting sports, action and wildlife.

Yes, Leica lenses had poor contrast in the 50's compared to Japanese lenses. Nikon manufactured several optics to be adapted to Leica cameras and Mr. Duncan used two of them with his Leica while shooting the war in Korea.
Nikon won a reputation then with their cameras and lenses. The rest is history.

Hanson

Leica missed the lead because they want perfection. That is what I heard. But I think the main issue was for Leica manual rangefinder system, AF was not an urgent/top priority?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Perfection led them to loose a great opportunity. Was or was not AF to perfection when Minolta put it in the market and I mean "perfection" for that time. Today AF is state of art.
Understand I am not a Leica fan. I can do identical images to Leica with my modern Olympus gear and professional lenses, at a bargain compared to Leica prices. Do not misunderstand me, I know of Leica quality. Today Canon and Nikon compete in price with Leica. I know how well a Summicron works but I never had issues using a Nikon 50mm f1.4 lens. Is the Summicron superior? well most probably it is but I am entirely satisfied with the performance offered by Nikon. The price of the Nikon seems a bargain compared to the price of the Summicron.

I once asked a German photographer shooting models here in Miami which one was better, Nikon or Leica. He answered without hesitation that Leica was superior. He was using a Nikon with Nikon lenses to shoot the models so go figure this out. Nikon still makes excellent cameras and lenses at reasonable prices not so Leica. I have no experience with Leica, I had one during the film era and it was a nightmare to load it so I sold it in a blink of an eye. The camera was made in Canada. The famous "Leica look" is something I have never been able to understand. I have seen trillions of images made with Leica lenses and they are not that different to those Nikon lenses make. I am sure that if murals are made from those images most probably Leica will win with the quality at the edges. I have seen pretty large enlargements from Nikon lenses and the quality has been superb.

I will never buy a Leica but I have nothing against the company nor to those who prefer Leica.

Hanson

People envy/like/use Leica for various reasons. Some of them may not be known to you. But I know that your opinion on Leica is not in minority.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

I’m sure you are aware that Leica’s SL 2, SL 2S and Q cameras all have AF. I don’t know if AF is even possible on a rangefinder camera.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Yes, I know those cameras have AF. I do not believe AF is possible with a rangefinder but remove the rangefinder and AF is possible like it has been with mirrorless cameras.
It has been interesting and at the same time a pleasure to participate in this thread.