Leica cameras?
Feb 27, 2019 13:51:48 #
Leica makes some exceptional cameras coupled with some of the best, and most expensive, lenses in the world. They do not compromise. Best of luck.
Feb 27, 2019 14:06:01 #
jerryc41 wrote:
That's emotional, and I don't pay for emotion.
But you do...everytime you purchase anything that factors into it.
Soap: "what's the washing experience like? Does it smell ok? Does it foam enough?
Car: "Whats the driving experience like? Is it a bumpy ride? Is it smooth? Does it make a lot of wind noise? Is it comfortable?
You do pay for it even if you think you don't.
Feb 27, 2019 14:09:45 #
For anyone who wants to know what the big deal is with Leica...here's a good one.
Body AND lens for the price of a digi-cam.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-M4-BLACK-CHROME-CAMERA-w-LEITZ-SUMMICRON-35MM-F-2-LENS-MORE-ACCESSORIES/254141754910?hash=item3b2c076e1e:g:KPUAAOSwDSRcdddQ:rk:11:pf:0&LH_BIN=1
Bonus...when you are done shooting with it next year...you can sell it for what you paid for it.
Body AND lens for the price of a digi-cam.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-M4-BLACK-CHROME-CAMERA-w-LEITZ-SUMMICRON-35MM-F-2-LENS-MORE-ACCESSORIES/254141754910?hash=item3b2c076e1e:g:KPUAAOSwDSRcdddQ:rk:11:pf:0&LH_BIN=1
Bonus...when you are done shooting with it next year...you can sell it for what you paid for it.
Feb 27, 2019 14:19:40 #
joehel2 wrote:
I can add a reason. After ten years, your Ferrari, Rolex, and Mont Blanc can be sold for what you paid for them and most times sold for a profit.
Amen!
Feb 27, 2019 14:23:28 #
billnikon wrote:
A camera is only as good as it's lenses. And Leica makes some of the BEST lenses available. Leica helped make 35mm camera's successful. German engineering continues to shine with Leica digital camera's. But what continues is the lens quality. Owned a Leica III single stroke with 50 and 135 lenses. They generated some of the best photo's I have ever taken. That said, I do not own any Leica today only because I am a wildlife photographer and that is not a strong suit for Leica.
Forgive me for asking but was your Leica an M-3? That Leica started using a double stroke to advance film and then came out with a single stroke advance. The III series prior to the M-3 was a twist knob to advance film. I am wondering which you had.
Dennis
Feb 27, 2019 15:11:01 #
Flash Gordon wrote:
Most of the cameras discussed on this forum are Nikon, Canon, Sony and others. I don’t recall any mention of the Leica brand. The cost of Leica’s seem to be comparable to the heigher end Nikon, Canon, Sony and others. I’m curious. Do any of the UHH members have and/or use the Leica brand? If so, why or why not. Is it the cost compared with other brands? Is it features compared with other brands? What say the group?
Flash Gordon
Punta Gorda, FL
Flash Gordon
Punta Gorda, FL
The plural of Leica is Leicas. No apostrophe.
Feb 27, 2019 15:27:17 #
I owned an M9 and some lenses, but sold them. the outfit didn't do what I expected. First, the digital Leoca M's are substantially heavier than the film M's, not measured but in perception. And second the lenses aare remarkably heavy for their size. So my eright reduction plan for my fast-aging body failed.
t hen there is the RF focusing. sometimes it is quite good but other times it's hard to see.
And the results were good, but really, I liked the faux-Zeiss lenses on my Contax G2 better.
t hen there is the RF focusing. sometimes it is quite good but other times it's hard to see.
And the results were good, but really, I liked the faux-Zeiss lenses on my Contax G2 better.
Feb 27, 2019 16:39:35 #
I not saying that a Leica camera is any better than any other camera. I have had Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Retina, and others camera. My Pentax K 1000 can take pictures just as good as my Leica IIIb. So why the Leica? It the history behind my Leica. I understand why people back in the 1930s & 40s wanted Leica cameras. Having own a few Nikons, I found Nikon's camera over rated. Reason for this is Nikon Company had a great P.R. Dept. Out side of my Pentax ,need battery for light meter only, I don't need any batteries for my cameras, which is great. Back to my Leica which was made in 1938, still working fine and value keep going up. Will one be able to said that with DSLR camera 81 years from now?
Feb 27, 2019 16:42:54 #
Harry0
Loc: Gardena, Cal
alfeng wrote:
FWIW. I believe the function of the "paper strips" was primarily to ensure the flange to film plane was the correct distance and NOT necessarily to square the flange with the film plane.
Well, it depends. You're talking about the full gasket effect; I;m talking about that thin slice on the bottom left. Sometimes both were used, especially on the old click focus types..
Feb 27, 2019 16:43:39 #
I think almost any serious photographer would kill to have the Monocrom but $7 or 8 grand for just the camera and then you have to get a $2000 or more lens. Like the guy said, need the lottery.
Feb 27, 2019 16:54:34 #
Have always wanted a Leica over the last 55 years. Never got one. I chose Nikon instead Nikkormat, F Photomic, FM2, D80, D300 & D7K still have the Nikkormat/D300 all the rest gone. I still have my Nikkor lenses - hooray!!
Now Leicas are a true luxury good. Their Digital cameras, from what I read, have limited life spans and very poor service support from Leica.
I now shoot Fuji. XE2, XT1 & XT2 with Fuji brilliant glass and lots of legacy glass from Nikon to Helios.
I would not dream of buying a digital Leica anymore even if I could afford it. They are a shining example of consumerism gone crazy.
Now Leicas are a true luxury good. Their Digital cameras, from what I read, have limited life spans and very poor service support from Leica.
I now shoot Fuji. XE2, XT1 & XT2 with Fuji brilliant glass and lots of legacy glass from Nikon to Helios.
I would not dream of buying a digital Leica anymore even if I could afford it. They are a shining example of consumerism gone crazy.
Feb 27, 2019 17:22:04 #
Justan observation. I know some Leica shooters and they are far from status seekers -- they cover the red dot on the camera. I have also noticed this on trips overseas. Take a look around and if you see someone wit a strip of gaffers tape on it, I'll bet it is a Leica. I'm sure there are folks who buy Leica just for the snob appeal but I would guess there are a lot more buy it because of the craftsmanship, legacy, and rendering. For me, I own a german made automatic wristwatch. I know it is not as accurate as some of the newer technology watches but I own because I admire the craftsmanship. And I think that is the real point here, you buy what appeals to you. As to the original question, I think the answer is price and technology. There just aren't a lot of people who want to pay the price or use a rangefinder camera.
Feb 27, 2019 17:29:37 #
AndyGarcia wrote:
Have always wanted a Leica over the last 55 years.... (show quote)
I enjoyed my X1, I traded my D200 for it, then sold it a couple of years ago. Got nice compliments from strangers, haptics were beyond pleasent...but 10 meg, no IBIS, no future to me, sold it and bought a EP-1 and EM-5, with Leica glass (I know)... happy and gettin ier everyday
Feb 27, 2019 18:49:38 #
I dont know much about Leica but have shot with and know an owner of a couple of Hasselblads. Are they expensive? Yes. At the same time, image quality is far above my D800. Colors are more natural, there is less post process needed. The lenses are super sharp, and the detail is incredible, almost a 3d feel. The difference here is that comparing a medium format Hasselblad with a 50 or 100MP back to a 35mm format Leica is unfair.
I don't know anyone who shoots Leica. I do know that lots of pros use Hasselblad or Phase I cause they want the best IQ possible. Because its their livelihood.
I dont consider a Hasselblad 100MP with 120mm lens for $40k overpriced for what it is and what it does. Even if can be a pain in the butt to use. Wouldn't want to use one for street photography. Too heavy for me to carry around and too expensive to risk on the street.
But if you have a studio, spend a lot on lights, models and sets, where do you want to cut corners?
I don't know anyone who shoots Leica. I do know that lots of pros use Hasselblad or Phase I cause they want the best IQ possible. Because its their livelihood.
I dont consider a Hasselblad 100MP with 120mm lens for $40k overpriced for what it is and what it does. Even if can be a pain in the butt to use. Wouldn't want to use one for street photography. Too heavy for me to carry around and too expensive to risk on the street.
But if you have a studio, spend a lot on lights, models and sets, where do you want to cut corners?
Feb 27, 2019 18:54:32 #
The Leica is one of those "classic" cameras, which appeals to people for the same reason Mont Blanc fountain pens, Rolls Royce cars, and Rolex watches appeal to people. But, just like Mont Blanc, Rolls Royce, and Rolex, the prices are outlandish, but the appeal of the brand is such that the manufacturers can get away with it. Leicas are not better than Nikons, Canons, or Sonys--just much more expensive. And in this digital age, frankly, the Leicas are far behind the Japanese competition.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.