contemplating a leica

Maxx787 · Mar 27, 2019

Agree...most people not aware of LEICA as was my experience owning M6 with 35mm in the days of Kodachrome. Also my 35mm MINOX on the bus shooting people going to work in London only got a casual frown. Small is beautiful. My LEICA images not just a study of light and shade but say something tangible in terms of the human mood; maybe my eyes are deceiving me; I don't think so. Even my CONTAX RTS2 with 28mm Made in West Germany failed on that score. LEICA Q2 the practising photographers best friend? Maybe I should claim the copyright on that claim? Note: LEICA Q best seller in my camera shop in Nice probably because most of the staff own LEICA making them very poor but rich in what they love best?

markusw · Mar 27, 2019

I know that Leica Lusting feel... However....

Are you fine with the IQ from the X-T30? Keep it.

Do you want the Rangefinder Form factor? Try Fuji‘s models.

Aren‘t you sure if 28mm is right for you? Get a used 18mm f2. Or you go a tad wider with the new 16/2.8

The Q2 is a highly professional tool with many options but also limitations. As long as money is a limiting factor, I would stay with Fuji. I do.

ViMa · Mar 27, 2019

Hi. I understand your thoughts. That Q2 looks great and I would be lying if I said I didn't consider it. In my case, I was saved by the fact that it is way beyond my budget even if I sold all my gear.

I would say that you almost certainly have no reason to spend 5k$ on that camera. I would see a point to someone getting it if they were happy with 28mm as their main focal length and didn't really need anything more other than maybe cropping in once in a while to get a 35mm or 50mm FOV.

If you want another camera, you could get yourself the X100F with the WCL for a fifth of the price of the Q2 and get similar results and the most fun to use camera I've ever owned.

Maxx787 · Mar 27, 2019

Owning a LEICA is a statement that money isn't everything if you believe that photography is an art form that allows the photographer to connect the camera with the imagination. It requires you to be a serious photographer. If such a camera exists then the results will happen. LEICA is a different camera made for perfectionists; on paper it should not exist financially speaking. LEICA is not all things to all men and women; LEICA a relatively small imaging instrument made with dedication and history. What a history!

ViMa · Mar 27, 2019

basleigh said:
Owning a LEICA is a statement that money isn't everything if you believe that photography is an art form that allows the photographer to connect the camera with the imagination. It requires you to be a serious photographer. If such a camera exists then the results will happen. LEICA is a different camera made for perfectionists; on paper it should not exist financially speaking. LEICA is not all things to all men and women; LEICA a relatively small imaging instrument made with dedication and history. What a history!

I'm sorry. I do not wish to come off as sarcastic or anything but where did you pull this out of? Would you care to elaborate why owning a Leica allows a photographer connect the camera with imagination as opposed to any other camera? Or why one needs to be a serious photographer to own a Leica? More importantly, what is it about the Leica that makes it for perfectionists? The fact that its technology is usually old? What makes the M10, say, a camera for perfectionists? No EVF, no AF etc. etc. is what perfectionists look for?

Look, I'm not a Leica hater. I just said above that I've been tempted by the Q2, and the truth s that I've spent many a nights dreaming of owning an M10, especially when I first started photography. The truth, though, is that all professional photographers I've met face to face, all bar none, have said that it's a pointless instrument nowadays and that it exists for rich people to feel pleased with themselves. They all suggested that even if I could afford it, I should spend my money otherwise. Were those people not serious photographers?

Maxx787 · Mar 27, 2019

But just think what the neighbors next door would say of you buying 5000 dollar LEICA camera; the same price of collectors 1966 Dodge Charger? Which would you prefer? So the neighbours think you're bonkers? Fine.....they don't know what they're missing.

Maxx787 · Mar 27, 2019

What is it that makes LEICA a camera for perfectionists? To start with the shutter is silent and allowed in US courts of justice. LEICA is not mass produced. LEICA is made without the price being the primary consideration. Perfection is something to strive for in any field of engineering. LEICA achieves that objective on most occasions; not always. German engineering has taken a knock in recent years; the truth being Germany is not always the best hence they often contact other designers from Italy for solutions like common rail diesel technology invented in Italy. Please excuse me going off subject. My point that in a world of passing fads and instant gratification the LEICA experience is a commitment to perfection and should be appreciated as such. They are not alone as with new NIKON Z models that are amazing. But LEICA is also a collectors hobby and sells at SOTHEBYS like no other. Appreciate your criticism.

WhateverNickname · Mar 27, 2019

I am also tempted, luckily the price is just too high ...

ViMa · Mar 27, 2019

Maxx787 said:
What is it that makes LEICA a camera for perfectionists? To start with the shutter is silent and allowed in US courts of justice.

This I disagree with. The X100F has a similarly silent shutter and so do many other cameras with leaf shutters.

Maxx787 said:
LEICA is not mass produced.

That I can accept and support. I prefer 'artisanal' stuff made with care for perfection to mass produced things.

Maxx787 said:
LEICA is made without the price being the primary consideration.

Yes. But also no. I feel that they are also taking advantage (why shouldn't they?) of the name and history in order to charge way more than their stuff is actually worth.

Maxx787 said:
Perfection is something to strive for in any field of engineering. LEICA achieves that objective on most occasions; not always.

Yes. With you. It seems like Leica glass is generally amazing and maybe the best, though I wouldn't have first hand experience.

Maxx787 said:
German engineering has taken a knock in recent years; the truth being Germany is not always the best hence they often contact other designers from Italy for solutions like common rail diesel technology invented in Italy. Please excuse me going off subject. My point that in a world of passing fads and instant gratification the LEICA experience is a commitment to perfection and should be appreciated as such.

I would say that Leica is indeed a commitment and it is a steady rock in a world of passing fads within the field of photography. Everyone knows what a Leica is. Again, I'm not sure about perfection though. Leica cameras - at least most of them - are cameras at their bare minimum. I appreciate that, personally. In fact, I've been shooting almost solely with everything manual in 2019, in a way not unlike using a Leica. But I would have thought that perfection within such a field would be to innovate and be perfect with the general demands of the everyday market. I do not feel like Leica are doing that. They are selling an old idea and are doing that well.

An example of what I would have wanted from Leica is the X-Pro series hybrid EVF/OVF. That's, in my mind, perfection. Keep the old stuff but innovate it and make it stay up to date with current technology.

Maxx787 said:
They are not alone as with new NIKON Z models that are amazing. But LEICA is also a collectors hobby and sells at SOTHEBYS like no other. Appreciate your criticism.

I am far from some Leica hater. If I could afford one easily, there is a 75% chance I'd buy into the system. But I'm not a pro. I can afford to miss shots and I don't care for shooting tele etc. But even now, with my X-T2, I appreciate it that when I see that I need AF, I can just turn a knob and get it. I can just switch to aperture priority and stop worrying about the shutter speed. etc. etc. etc.

Sjak · Mar 27, 2019

ViMa said:
The truth, though, is that all professional photographers I've met face to face, all bar none, have said that it's a pointless instrument nowadays and that it exists for rich people to feel pleased with themselves. They all suggested that even if I could afford it, I should spend my money otherwise. Were those people not serious photographers?

Another truth is that plenty of professional shooters do use Leica ;-) (yes, also the M-system)

Or do these pro's you talked to suggest e.g. Joel Meyerowitz is not a serious photographer?

Besides, this "rich people's toy"-talk is plain nonsense, possibly fueled by envy.

It's all a matter of preferences, shooting style, etc.

For me, my Monochrom is just a camera, just as my Fuji or Pentax. Yes I had to save up a bit longer for it, so what

It's plain nonsense that a Leica is just for dentists and lawyers; with some discipline, most of us can afford one if we want to.

FTOG · Mar 27, 2019

basleigh said:
Owning a LEICA is a statement that money isn't everything if you believe that photography is an art form that allows the photographer to connect the camera with the imagination. It requires you to be a serious photographer. If such a camera exists then the results will happen. LEICA is a different camera made for perfectionists; on paper it should not exist financially speaking. LEICA is not all things to all men and women; LEICA a relatively small imaging instrument made with dedication and history. What a history!

Eh. Sorry, but a Leica is a tool like any other camera. Having a rangefinder, it'll be better at certain things (providing out-of-frame visibility in the viewfinder, simplified to the essentials) and worse in other regards (no "you get what you see" in the viewfinder, no AF in rangefinder Leicas, tele photography, parallax issues).

Mere ownership of a more expensive tool doesn't make its owner better or worse than their peers. A chef won't cook a better tasting meal with their more expensive pots if they have not learned their craft and honed their senses.

There is a lot of justified admiration for Leica's contribution to photography and their extremely high quality products. But sometimes owners of their products get a bit too intoxicated and aloof by the philosophical "superiority" of their tools. Let's all get down to earth and have a pragmatic look at rangefinder cameras like any other kind of camera, please.

Sincerely, a Leica M owner.

ViMa · Mar 27, 2019

FTOG said:
basleigh said:

Owning a LEICA is a statement that money isn't everything if you believe that photography is an art form that allows the photographer to connect the camera with the imagination. It requires you to be a serious photographer. If such a camera exists then the results will happen. LEICA is a different camera made for perfectionists; on paper it should not exist financially speaking. LEICA is not all things to all men and women; LEICA a relatively small imaging instrument made with dedication and history. What a history!

Click to expand...

Eh. Sorry, but a Leica is a tool like any other camera. Having a rangefinder, it'll be better at certain things (providing out-of-frame visibility in the viewfinder, simplified to the essentials) and worse in other regards (no "you get what you see" in the viewfinder, no AF in rangefinder Leicas, tele photography, parallax issues).

Mere ownership of a more expensive tool doesn't make its owner better or worse than their peers. A chef won't cook a better tasting meal with their more expensive pots if they have not learned their craft and honed their senses.

There is a lot of justified admiration for Leica's contribution to photography and their extremely high quality products. But sometimes owners of their products get a bit too intoxicated and aloof by the philosophical "superiority" of their tools. Let's all get down to earth and have a pragmatic look at rangefinder cameras like any other kind of camera, please.

Sincerely, a Leica M owner.

Yes. I guess that is what I wanted to say but did so in much worse a way than you did. Leicas seem amazing and I wish I got the chance to at least play with one. It's the things about 'perfection' and 'superiority' etc. that get me.

FTOG · Mar 27, 2019

ViMa said:
Leicas seem amazing and I wish I got the chance to at least play with one. It's the things about 'perfection' and 'superiority' etc. that get me.

For me, a rangefinder camera delivers mostly a different photographing experience. I am an amateur enthusiast, I don't make a living with the output. So I'll happily accept a lot of the limitations and the inconveniences in return for the shooting experience.

As for the affordability of Leicas, the digital cameras are very expensive, and probably a bit more expensive than they need to be. What I'd recommend is to look at used Leica M2/M3/M4/M6 or Voigtländer Bessa bodies, and a Konica, Voigtländer, or adapted LTM lens (Canon, Nikon, Voigtländer, Leica, Zeiss). The combination of these two brings the barrier of entry way down. Sure, there's the cost of film (and an external light meter in case of the M2/M3/M4). But you can but a whole lot of film before you have spent as much as a digital body.

Trying to keep the off topic to a minimum, I am happy to talk about this in private messages if you're interested.

Polybazze · Mar 27, 2019

So much time and effort wasted on wanting more and being dissatisfied with what you already have.

biza43 · Mar 27, 2019

You forgot to mention the "why".

Maxx787 · Mar 27, 2019

To quote British TV personality JEREMY CLARKSON when confronting a group of young German students; Why are you Germans always acting so superior to us? Slightly shocked one German female student quickly responded: Well perhaps you feel inferior (logically speaking) because we do not feel superior to you? Everyone laughed nervously even the German students.

Tom Schum · Mar 27, 2019

biza43 said:
You forgot to mention the "why".

I think that's the main point!

When I got my Canon 30D in 2004 I felt pretty good about it. I started taking more pictures, and better ones too.

If the OP is considering a Leica, no doubt he/she will be delighted to have and use it. Because of this delight, their photographic style and vision might be changing for the better.

This factor alone is good justification for buying.

As for me, I like cheap and small and light. Fuji offers me a sort of high end experience of this with the X-T100, and I really like my Fuji. I have no desire for a Leica at this point. I'd be afraid to use one. Too expensive for me. Takes the pleasure out of it, for me. I'd be afraid of putting a scratch on the LCD or something.

biza43 · Mar 27, 2019

Tom Schum said:
biza43 said:

You forgot to mention the "why".

Click to expand...

I think that's the main point!

When I got my Canon 30D in 2004 I felt pretty good about it. I started taking more pictures, and better ones too.

If the OP is considering a Leica, no doubt he/she will be delighted to have and use it. Because of this delight, their photographic style and vision might be changing for the better.

Why? Just because it is a Leica? Mind you, the Q2 for a high res FF camera with a fast Leica 28mm lens, it is actually not that expensive for what it is. The "why" needs to be clearly stated: does the OP requires high res? Does he really like 28mm FOV with a fast lens and FF? What can he get from the Q2 that he can not get from the Fuji X system?

Tom Schum said:
This factor alone is good justification for buying.

For you, not for me. Getting expensive gear does not make anybody a better photographer. Especially when one can not state what the expensive gear brings new to the table, what will be the factor introduced by the Q2 in terms of photographic objective that will be a game changer for the potential buyer.

Tom Schum · Mar 27, 2019

biza43 said:
Tom Schum said:

biza43 said:

You forgot to mention the "why".

Click to expand...

I think that's the main point!

When I got my Canon 30D in 2004 I felt pretty good about it. I started taking more pictures, and better ones too.

If the OP is considering a Leica, no doubt he/she will be delighted to have and use it. Because of this delight, their photographic style and vision might be changing for the better.

Click to expand...

Why? Just because it is a Leica? Mind you, the Q2 for a high res FF camera with a fast Leica 28mm lens, it is actually not that expensive for what it is. The "why" needs to be clearly stated: does the OP requires high res? Does he really like 28mm FOV with a fast lens and FF? What can he get from the Q2 that he can not get from the Fuji X system?

biza43 said:

This factor alone is good justification for buying.

Click to expand...

For you, not for me. Getting expensive gear does not make anybody a better photographer. Especially when one can not state what the expensive gear brings new to the table, what will be the factor introduced by the Q2 in terms of photographic objective that will be a game changer for the potential buyer.

I see you agree with me about the technical details. This is why I shoot a X-T100 with lower cost fully manual lenses. I can get Fuji image quality at a low price, and it matches or exceeds what I might get with larger and more expensive alternatives. If I drop it, scratch it, or if it gets stolen, it is not a financial catastrophe for me, so I am able to enjoy it without worrying about it too much.

But, I don't really NEED any of it. It's a hobby for me. I do it because I have fun with it. I think a lot of people who are into photography as enthusiasts feel the same way. If the OP expects to have great fun with a Leica Q2, and they can come up with the money for it, I say "Great!"

I think the user experience is very important. Technical performance really can't support this most of the time (unless you, like me, care about technical performance), but the feeling of having and using such an instrument subtly changes how one approaches the hobby. It can convey the subconscious message of honoring the artistic side, "my hobby is worth the trouble".

I'm proud of how I have assembled a good Fuji kit at a low cost, and when I tell other Fuji users about how cheaply I've done it, their response seems similar to smart phone people who look confused when you show them your flip phone. It helps them enjoy their hobby if they buy Fuji's best lenses and bodies. Same for the OP and the Leica Q2.

deednets · Mar 27, 2019

biza43 said:
Tom Schum said:

biza43 said:

You forgot to mention the "why".

Click to expand...

I think that's the main point!

When I got my Canon 30D in 2004 I felt pretty good about it. I started taking more pictures, and better ones too.

If the OP is considering a Leica, no doubt he/she will be delighted to have and use it. Because of this delight, their photographic style and vision might be changing for the better.

Click to expand...

Why? Just because it is a Leica? Mind you, the Q2 for a high res FF camera with a fast Leica 28mm lens, it is actually not that expensive for what it is. The "why" needs to be clearly stated: does the OP requires high res? Does he really like 28mm FOV with a fast lens and FF? What can he get from the Q2 that he can not get from the Fuji X system?

biza43 said:

This factor alone is good justification for buying.

Click to expand...

For you, not for me. Getting expensive gear does not make anybody a better photographer. Especially when one can not state what the expensive gear brings new to the table, what will be the factor introduced by the Q2 in terms of photographic objective that will be a game changer for the potential buyer.

contemplating a leica

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts