Leica works

[flez007]

I have a couple of friends that moved to the SLR world coming from pocket digital camaras, now they are back into what they call the high-end of cameras - full frame Leicas.

They are, according to them, the best of both worlds - incredible picture quality and small. Thete are to options, the X1 that represents the entry-level at $2.5Kusd to the M9 for roughly $10Kusd with lens.

I am curious to learn if someone have had experience with this cameras in particular, and differences between a regular SLR (i own a D3000 from Nikon) and this ones described.

 

[Steve Williams]

I have a couple of friends that moved to the SLR world coming from pocket digital camaras, now they are back into what they call the high-end of cameras - full frame Leicas.

They are, according to them, the best of both worlds - incredible picture quality and small. Thete are to options, the X1 that represents the entry-level at $2.5Kusd to the M9 for roughly $10Kusd with lens.

I am curious to learn if someone have had experience with this cameras in particular, and differences between a regular SLR (i own a D3000 from Nikon) and this ones described.

I have never used one and I suppose the M9 could be said to be the pinnacle of cameras of this size. They are sure eye candy in the display case with all of their lenses beside the camera body. Which is the model that is all black or can you get the M9 all black as well

 

[Steve Williams]

I have a couple of friends that moved to the SLR world coming from pocket digital camaras, now they are back into what they call the high-end of cameras - full frame Leicas.

They are, according to them, the best of both worlds - incredible picture quality and small. Thete are to options, the X1 that represents the entry-level at $2.5Kusd to the M9 for roughly $10Kusd with lens.

I am curious to learn if someone have had experience with this cameras in particular, and differences between a regular SLR (i own a D3000 from Nikon) and this ones described.

I have never used one and I suppose the M9 could be said to be the pinnacle of cameras of this size. They are sure eye candy in the display case with all of their lenses beside the camera body. Which is the model that is all black or can you get the M9 all black as well

 

[naturephoto1]

I have only had the chance to see the M9 at Photoplus at the Javits Center in NYC. It handles much like the manual focus M series film based Leicas. I have never used Leica M cameras myself. But, I have been a long time (since 1984) Leica R film based camera user of including:

The R8 was the 2nd to the last R series Leica camera and predecessor to Leica's last R series camera the R9.

Leica Cameras and their lenses are limited production and legendary. There is real satisfaction in handing and using these precision pieces of equipment. Leica lenses perform to an extraordinary level, not just in sharpness, but in many other areas of lens performance. No other manual focus lenses have the buttery feel for focus of these brass on aluminum self lubricating focusing helix's and there is no backlash in the focusing. However, because of the metals used in these lenses they are rather heavy particularly for their small size in the M series of optics.

Rich

 

[amirm]

It is the camera Leica should have built all along. Good reviews to boot: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/m9-first.shtml

 

[mimesis]

The number one advantage of using a Leica is the glass. The cost of lenses, particularly new or recent makes the cost of the M9 body seem cheap. Of course, if one fashions himself (or herself) to be HCB-21st century style, an M9 and a 50mm Summicron would be enough. As far as the comparison to an SLR in general and a digital SLR in particular, here are the things to consider.

Any modern SLR uses autofocus, which is helpful in general and in tracking moving subjects in particular. The M9 is a manual focus camera and it is a rangefinder. If you have never used a rangefinder you may find it difficult to use. There is a double-image that you align so that there is just one image. For many, the image you see is tiny; the magnification can seem poor (the objects are really small). However, the great advantage versus an 100% viewfinder (whether SLR or LCD screen) is that you can see beyond the image that will be taken. Thus you can snap at the decisive moment of action and freeze the subject at the critical juncture.

Of course, if you couldn't focus, you have the decisive moment rendered but poorly. The M9 has some quirks. It has an LCD screen that is low-res for its price bracket. It is slow to use. You have to remove the entire bottom to get to the card or battery (this is copying the classic M body for no apparent reason). It does not have an anti-alias filter, thus offering the potential for much sharper native images (most sensors require sharpening to deal with the AA filter's effects; look at a RAW image and you will see this immediately). The tradeoff is the possibility of moire for things with stripes or repeating line patterns.

An M9 is smaller but is not much lighter; all Leica gear is built to last forever and made mostly of metal. The lenses are to die for. If you get an M and like it you may end up jumping off the upgrade chain...and even get M film bodies as well as start a collection of Leica gear that can quickly approach or exceed the time and money spent on audio (since you may wish to expand your lens collection, travel so you can take photographs etc.).

The nice thing about the M9 and things like it is that they are smaller, less imposing, esp. compared with an SLR with a massive zoom lens with a 77m front element and hood and thus people are less likely to notice that you are shooting.

My father has an M9, but at his advanced age the focusing is difficult. I like it and may acquire it from him. Otherwise, I use my manual, film M7 and MP, R8 or if digital, things which remind me of the Leica experience, lately the Ricoh GXR.

I would consider the Leica X1 after they offer the firmware update to see if the focus speed improves. Apples to apples, the Ricoh GXR won my vote - same sensor, versatility of lenses, current SOTA LCD screen and excellent fairly fast prime lenses (28 and 50mm equivalent f2.5).

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Leica are extremely well made and feel like fine jewelry... Ergonomic and well balanced, I was a semi-pro back in college and used a variety of equipment. Nikon (the go-to 35 mm), Hasselblad (go-to 6 x 6), LWista (go-to 4 x 5) and for casual picture taking Leica CL with the duo of 45 and 90 mm... or Rollei 35 ... That was before autofocus and it was much easier to focus with the CL than ANY of the camera I mentioned here ... Great pictures, etc.. Despite the legend of Leica lenses I must say that other and I found the Nikkor 105/2.5 much better than the 90mm Summicron of the CL... Better color rendition, better contrast, better "pique"... A frech to express the feeling of picture popping out...
All that to say that while I appreciate and have experienced the quality of Leica products, I am not entirely certain they are superior to the Japanese offering,especially the aforementioned Nikon (my favorite) and Canon... In the Pro word, these are the two most used cameras .. The ones you will take to the most challenging environments in the world... Very rarely and I am repeat very rarely would you see Pros or photo-journalists with anything else but their Nikon or Canon, The variety of lenses has to do with that but ultimately it is the quality of the lenses , the general reliability and quality of the gears that motivates the choice. Yes Leicas are great... Superior to Canon and Nikon? I have my strong doubts... Facts do not point to that.
Another thing, AF has advanced to an extent I don't honestly see the advantage or necessity of manual focus, maybe as a back-up, if AF is not working well, these days there are really few lighting situation in which AF doesn't work well. The absence or rather the lack of AF in a modern camera is difficult to comprehend, even less justify

 

[naturephoto1]

Frantz,

The Leica CL 40mm (not 45mm- there was none) and the 90mm lenses though quite good are not and never were equal to the performance of the Leica M or R series lenses.

As to the Nikor 105 f2.5 lens, that was and is a legendary Nikor lens. Each of the major makers of 35mm and now digital makers make fine lenses. But, each maker has certain standout lenses. That includes the Nikor 105mm standard and macro lenses. As a line of lenses however, Leica is known for making quite possibly the finest line of lenses. They may not be as sharp as some of their Japanese equivalents. But, they have other qualities including shooting wide open without certain kinds of distortion associated with their performance. Additionally, for the longest time, slides taken with Leica lenses were known to have a certain look to them that made them stand out from other makers.

As to the question of which camera makers equipment are used by Pros, there is no question that many more Pros use Canon or Nikon. Leica cameras may not have been as reliable for Professional punishment. But, Leica cameras and lenses tend to be more precise than their Japanese counterparts. And, because they are largely hand built and in limited numbers they tend to be much more expensive in fact so much so that most Pros can not afford them or are concernced about damaging these cameras. That is why they are used largely by the extremely well to do, doctors, attorneys, and dentists. Leicas also have become extremely collectable due to their precison manufacture and their rarity.

If you want a Leica SLR with autofocus it is available and will cost you at this point with the Leica S2. Unfortunately this Medium Format digital camera with 1.5X the size for the sensor and the number of mega pixels of the 25 mega pixel digital 35mm cameras that is a little smaller than the size of the top of the line Nikon or Canon digital SLR, costs $23,000 without a lens. By the way, Leica was the inventor of autofocus. But, it is not as accurate as manual focus. It has taken Leica from 1966 to about 2008 to finally incorporate it into their cameras with interchangeable lenses, that being the S2.

Rich

 

[garylkoh]

I LIKE this - an objective/subjective debate starting in the Photography forum

That is why they are used largely by the extremely well to do, doctors, attorneys, and dentists.

I remember years ago a debate between two of my photography friends - one with a rich surgeon father, another with a rich lawyer father. Both with LeicaR3. The furious debate then was whether the Leica (expensive) lens or the Angenieux (even more expensive) lens gave better colours and contrast. I don't recall either of them being particularly good photographers.

 

[naturephoto1]

I LIKE this - an objective/subjective debate starting in the Photography forum



I remember years ago a debate between two of my photography friends - one with a rich surgeon father, another with a rich lawyer father. Both with LeicaR3. The furious debate then was whether the Leica (expensive) lens or the Angenieux (even more expensive) lens gave better colours and contrast. I don't recall either of them being particularly good photographers.

Hi Gary,

Thanks. By the way, the R3 was only a fair camera. It was the first of the R series cameras with the same chassis used in the Minolta camera in this case the XE7. The next generation of cameras were much better and were the R4 through R7 which were based upon the chassis used in the Minolta XD11.

Wheter Leicas are used by the more affluent or not who are not necessarily the best photographers there are and have been many skilled and well known photographers to have used Leicas including Alfred Eisenstadt, Ralph Gibson, Fred Maroon, David Duncan Douglas, Ernst Haas, Hugo van Lawick to name but a few.

Rich

 

[amirm]

The main Kill app I see for this camera in this day an age is candid photography. My current camera stands out too much especially given the white lenses from Canon. I do fine by it and use AF heavily to capture my shots. Still, I see the appeal of these smaller cameras, especially if there is a risk of getting punched in the face or the police being called because you took a picture of someone .

The second appeal is that Canon wide angle lenses are just not that good. So the better lenses here could be helpful. That said, I just dusted off my 24mm Tilt/Shift and shot some indoor pictures and was amazed at how good it came out and effectiveness of those controls for indoor shots.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Indeed the normal lCL ens was a 40 mm, my mistake. Having used several Leica bodies and lenses (I had a M4 for a while then an S2) I could never rationalize their prices, especially when compared to the Japanese offerings. By the way one of the most "precise" lenses I had the opportunity to use was the 50 /1.4 Olympus zuiko, a very sweet, "precise" and high definition lens with excellent contrast at all apertures. I don't really want to come as a contrarian but in term of real performance, I fail to see where Leica lenses are superior to the Japanese offerings, cameras, bodies or accessories. In the beginning? circa 1950-60 But since the Nikon F (1959?) and definitely by the early 1970's the Japanese offering were superior...what remained was the cachet and a the Leica mystique ..not much IMO ... Now in medium format Rollei and Hasselblad have had the upper hand both in bodies, accessories or lenses ... Too bad there were never a 6x7 from Rollei or 'blad nor a 4.5 x 6 (Yeah I know Hasselblad has or had a 4.5 x 6 back for the 500 C). Mamiya and Pentax had cameras in both the 6x7 asnd 645 format
...To this day, Hasselblad continues to be the Gold Standard for medium format... Performances and reliability commensurate with the lofty price ... As for the Leica ....

 

[flez007]

I would consider the Leica X1 after they offer the firmware update to see if the focus speed improves. Apples to apples, the Ricoh GXR won my vote - same sensor, versatility of lenses, current SOTA LCD screen and excellent fairly fast prime lenses (28 and 50mm equivalent f2.5).

After some further research (and balancing getting this camera or an FM Acoustics phono preamp) I might take the X1 route instead, besides the slow AF it looks that has all what I want and at the same time keep my D3000 depending on the ocassion.

 

[naturephoto1]

Hi

Indeed the normal lCL ens was a 40 mm, my mistake. Having used several Leica bodies and lenses (I had a M4 for a while then an S2) I could never rationalize their prices, especially when compared to the Japanese offerings. By the way one of the most "precise" lenses I had the opportunity to use was the 50 /1.4 Olympus zuiko, a very sweet, "precise" and high definition lens with excellent contrast at all apertures. I don't really want to come as a contrarian but in term of real performance, I fail to see where Leica lenses are superior to the Japanese offerings, cameras, bodies or accessories. In the beginning? circa 1950-60 But since the Nikon F (1959?) and definitely by the early 1970's the Japanese offering were superior...what remained was the cachet and a the Leica mystique ..not much IMO ... Now in medium format Rollei and Hasselblad have had the upper hand both in bodies, accessories or lenses ... Too bad there were never a 6x7 from Rollei or 'blad nor a 4.5 x 6 (Yeah I know Hasselblad has or had a 4.5 x 6 back for the 500 C). Mamiya and Pentax had cameras in both the 6x7 asnd 645 format
...To this day, Hasselblad continues to be the Gold Standard for medium format... Performances and reliability commensurate with the lofty price ... As for the Leica ....

Unfortunately Rollei is now out of business (having gone bankrupt now twice) and the way things are going, Hasselbald may follow suit. As to 6 X 7 cameras, I use the Mamiya 7II rangefinder camera which has some of the best medium format lenses ever designed. But, like all rangefinder film based cameras it has it's limitations in usage. I still have my Rolleiflex 3.5F 12/24 Planar TLR and my Rollei 35S as well as my Leica R8, R7, and R4 SP.

Rich

 

[garylkoh]

Hi Gary,

Thanks. By the way, the R3 was only a fair camera. It was the first of the R series cameras with the same chassis used in the Minolta camera in this case the XE7. The next generation of cameras were much better and were the R4 through R7 which were based upon the chassis used in the Minolta XD11.

Wheter Leicas are used by the more affluent or not who are not necessarily the best photographers there are and have been many skilled and well known photographers to have used Leicas including Alfred Eisenstadt, Ralph Gibson, Fred Maroon, David Duncan Douglas, Ernst Haas, Hugo van Lawick to name but a few.

Rich

Sorry, Rich. I was being facetious.

I was a Minolta user from the SR-7 to the XE-1 and finally the XD-11. I couldn't understand why anyone would buy the R3 - which at that time in Singapore was probably 4x the price of the XE-1..... and at that time Angenieux made a mount that would fit the Minolta.

 

[naturephoto1]

The main Kill app I see for this camera in this day an age is candid photography. My current camera stands out too much especially given the white lenses from Canon. I do fine by it and use AF heavily to capture my shots. Still, I see the appeal of these smaller cameras, especially if there is a risk of getting punched in the face or the police being called because you took a picture of someone .

The second appeal is that Canon wide angle lenses are just not that good. So the better lenses here could be helpful. That said, I just dusted off my 24mm Tilt/Shift and shot some indoor pictures and was amazed at how good it came out and effectiveness of those controls for indoor shots.

Leica has been known for outstanding wide angle M and R series lenses for an extremely long time. I have tried without success from the mid to late 1980s onward to try to persuade Leica to design tilt and shift lenses for their R series cameras. Unfortunately, they discontinued the R series cameras several years ago, but they may come out with one for the new Leica S2. If it is released and it is not designed by Leica, Leica may renew its relationship with Schneider and have Schneider design the lens.

Rich

 

[mimesis]

I'm not sure that Hasselblad are still the gold standard today - Phase One backs are quite popular and serious, sober reviews on the web indicate that the Hasseblad glass is not up to the sensor whereas the new Leica S glass is up to the S2 sensor.

As for the comment on Nikon and Canon v Leica, I'd recommend reading the variety of opinions of those who offer thorough evaluations before agreeing to any conclusion drawn here. A well-known Leica tester, Erwin Puts, documents quite objectively and systematically the color rendition, resolution and chromatic aberrations of the various Leica lenses wide open, stopped down and at f5.6 or f8.

The advent of digital sensors and high ISO obviates the need for f1.4 (and it is true that a close focusing distances the depth of field is quite small on 50 and 85mm lenses) but for what they offer, including their manufacture, Leica is quite good (esp if you acquired lenses over the last 20 years, as I have). At today's prices? Not so much.

As for the proliferation of gear; if the Ford F150 is the best selling pick up truck, that doesn't mean it is the best pick up truck; sales volume is not an indicator of quality but of distribution network, sales efficiency, demand, support and price.

William

 

[naturephoto1]

I'm not sure that Hasselblad are still the gold standard today - Phase One backs are quite popular and serious, sober reviews on the web indicate that the Hasseblad glass is not up to the sensor whereas the new Leica S glass is up to the S2 sensor.

As for the comment on Nikon and Canon v Leica, I'd recommend reading the variety of opinions of those who offer thorough evaluations before agreeing to any conclusion drawn here. A well-known Leica tester, Erwin Puts, documents quite objectively and systematically the color rendition, resolution and chromatic aberrations of the various Leica lenses wide open, stopped down and at f5.6 or f8.

The advent of digital sensors and high ISO obviates the need for f1.4 (and it is true that a close focusing distances the depth of field is quite small on 50 and 85mm lenses) but for what they offer, including their manufacture, Leica is quite good (esp if you acquired lenses over the last 20 years, as I have). At today's prices? Not so much.

As for the proliferation of gear; if the Ford F150 is the best selling pick up truck, that doesn't mean it is the best pick up truck; sales volume is not an indicator of quality but of distribution network, sales efficiency, demand, support and price.

William

But, as has been the case for an extremely long time, Leica lenses like other makers are available on the used market and in excellent condition. They do however tend to be expensive, but substantially less expensive than when purchased new at today's prices.

Rich

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

The Canon and Nikon top-of-the-lines can't be compared to Ford F-150. They are performance leaders in most if not ALL categories. The performance to price ratio is extremely high. I can't say that about leica and that has been for a long time .. Since the mid 80's. I do understand the feel that a Leica M provides. I had an M4 and know very the feel... I also thought the Leica SLR to be extremely well balanced. The Nikon F wasn't, 2 was a little better ...then came the Nikon F3, things changed and in the meaatimes the Japanese were producing optics as good or better than what the German were... The mystique remained but the objective reality shifted and professional photographers just moved toward quality, performance and reliability thus the mass exodus toward Nikon and Canon... and it wasn't a budget thing, National Geographic , Time Life and the News Agencies could afford anything they wanted .. their best pictures were shot with Nikon.. The best Fashion Photographers use Nikon ...
The best comparison to me would be the difference between a BMW M5 and the Maseratti Quattroporte .. The Maserati has the Mystique, the name, the panache, the Italian flair and likely the babe-attracting factor.. Put them in a track, on the street or in real use and believe me the M5 would run circles and then more around the Maseratti .. The Nikon D3 series and Canon EOS-1 are at the top of the full frame (35mm) game no doubt ... Reliable, solid extremely high performance cameras .. unmatched..

I apologize for coming so strong with such not-so-impressed view of Leica in a Leica thread but if performance and reliability are the metrics, Leica takes a back seat and has for more than 3 decades ...

P.S. I did use the the RB-67 I called it the train... A friend of mine used it exclusively for Wedding Photography ... To this day, this makes no sense to me to lug such a huge beast around but .. to each his own ..

 

[naturephoto1]

Frantz,

Though much too expensive at 23,000 for the body, and not as fast as the Canon or Nikon top of the line digital SLRs for image advance, you owe it to yourself to handle the new Leica S2. Absolutely astounding for a camera of this size and this much storage per image. It is a tour de force. By the way, when they were still making film based SLR cameras, Leica made the DMR- digital modular R that allowed a Leica R8 or a Leica R9 film based camera to be turned into a digital camera. That was something that both Nikon and Canon thought was not possible. But, Leica proved them wrong. Though, it was only 10 megapixel and was not full frame, it did demonstrate Leica's capabilities in design and working with other makers that has now been brought to bear with the S2. Hopefully, there will be a smaller digital SLR camera to come that will take the Leica R glass as well as newly designed autofocus lenses.

Also, if you are unaware, the Leica R8 and R9 cameras were considered to be some of the finest manual focus film based 35mm SLR cameras ever offered by any manufacturer. That is not just my opinion, but it is the opinion of most of the magazines and professional users of film based SLR cameras.

As to the Mamiya RB or RZ67 as good as they are for their application, for portability, performance, and speed of operation, the Mamaiya 7II film camera that I use is extraordinary. Regardless of what some photographers have claimed, I have never found a medium format film based camera to put as much information on slide film as any of my Rodenstock, Schneider, Fuji, or Nikon large format lenses on Fujichrome Velvia 50 or 100 transparency film.

Rich