Fred Miranda wrote:
I thought about this for a while and believe it may be the best solution. I am always hesitant to fragment the forum any further as we need high activity for a new board to succeed. The alternative board was super active in the past because it had Sony as the main actor. We were adapting all sort of lenses on Sony and therefore the "alternative" name made a lot of sense.
At that time, it was really the "alternative" to Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Now that Sony and Fuji have their own dedicated boards, most of the discussions here are about legacy lenses that can be adapted to Leica or compatible Leica lenses adapted to other cameras. Therefore calling it "Leica & Alternative Gear" makes more sense for our board today.
Everythingis1 wrote:
So range finder focusing is the only reason you own a Leica and it's worth as much as your other significantly more capable cameras? Nothing to do with the brand name or the aesthetic of the camera? I'm calling complete BS plain and simple. You're either lying or ignorant to what years of advertising did to your perception. If what you were saying were true you would be in such a statistical minority as to render it an outlier not even worth considering in the conversation. So what's my magical thinking? Are you really trying to tell me people are buying 10k Leica's because of the act of focusing using a rangefinder? Oh, thats right, you're different though so you don't need to be lumped in with the vast VAST majority of Leica users.
So why so responsive if my post clearly doesn't apply to you? Maybe... you're emotionally attached to a brand name? ...Show more →
Yes, the reason I own a Leica is because I like range finder focussing, and you can call BS all you want but I am not lying or delusional. That is simply my preference. I don't think I am different from others either or a statistical minority either. I never said any of that and if you think that I can't imagine why. Your magical thinking is that you obviously are claiming to be able to read my mind. It appears that you actually think you can decipher my motives and intentions without ever having met me or discussed anything with me, you seem to believe you understand me much better than I understand myself. That belief in the ability to read people's minds and know their motivations with basically no information is very much magical thinking. There is a simple way to know what people are thinking--listen to what they say and believe them. That doesn't take magic. I recommend that non-magical thinking as you interact with people in the future.
Not trying to defend or support anyone but let's put things in context...
Why buy Fuji XT4 when you can spend a little more for a Nikon Z6ii? Why buy a Phase One or Hassy when you can buy a Fuji GFX 100s? Why buy a Leica M3 when you can...Uh...Basically swim around a pool with other old film camera? It's exactly that - the price. Topics don't quite seem connected without the mention of price. People are just questioning the sanity of spending triple the price for less. It's hard not to relate this phenomenon to people spending for Rolex or a Chanel.
One still can't deny that people love different things, and willing to pay for it. Who are we to judge? If money can buy happiness, why not? Why we should go extra miles to attack people who found happiness?
As I mentioned in my previous post, the Leica appeal is exactly what they're infamous for - you pay more for less. Slap on a 28mm for example - the VF opening is so small that you can barely see the whole thing without jamming your eyes onto the window. Forget about framing if you wear glasses. You need good vision to even focus. You need to judge the metering with experiences. With parallax, what you see is never what you get. That's exactly where the funs are. Just like why more and more people shoot film. It makes photography tactile and engaged. People find they're more involved in arts than tech. People have more to look forward to.
Which we can now apply the same criticism - it's delusional to think buying the latest tech can make you a better/superior photographer, or a smarter person.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
it's hard not to relate this phenomenon to people spending for Rolex or a Chanel.
I'm not sure this is a pertinent comparison.
Buying an expensive watch does not changes anything except the fact that you are happy/proud or something else to wear it.
When it comes to objects we use such as cameras, cars, hobbyist gear, using what we feel the most comfortable with changes our mindset and usually for the best.
For instance, I practice Archery. Every non beginner at the club as a excellent bow with chosen accessories. It is not because they are expensive (compared to Leica M, cars, watches, etc, they are not), it is not because one can brag in the street (as it is unlawful), it does not change the status inside the club.
And most of us could theoretically be as good with something half the price.
Except that the fact that we have what we want, that we know it is more than adequate for us makes us forget about it, increase our trust that we are the sole limitation, not the gear we use, makes us feel good somehow...
This is nothing new and it has been true since the down of mankind: people dedicated to their craft tend to be very particular about their tools.
pmeheut wrote:
I'm not sure this is a pertinent comparison.
Buying an expensive watch does not changes anything except the fact that you are happy/proud or something else to wear it.
That's the point. People bring out the point because of the price tag alone.
Even worse, it's like spend more for a Rolex where you need to calibrate the time if you accidentally bang the watch on the wall, or the timing telling is slightly off where you need to judge how much it's off by looking at where the sun is in the sky. Heck the hands and numbers are so small that you need a good eye sight to be able to see it clearly.
It's a different thing as we know it, time telling need to be accurate to a standard. We don't tell time in the form of art, or the world will be in trouble. Photography is an art as we can express it as such, we don't need perfection all the time. In fact, with the super accurate super fast auto focus, WYSIWYG, you get the idea. Like drawing on a tablet with pressure sensitive pen, than actually drawing on paper and canvas. People appreciate the effort of actually using a brush and mediums where we can see imperfections and very human, over the very same result using tablet where it'll auto correct your sloppy strokes, and undo your mistakes any way you like.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, the reason I own a Leica is because I like range finder focussing, and you can call BS all you want but I am not lying or delusional. That is simply my preference. I don't think I am different from others either or a statistical minority either. I never said any of that and if you think that I can't imagine why. Your magical thinking is that you obviously are claiming to be able to read my mind. It appears that you actually think you can decipher my motives and intentions without ever having met me or discussed anything with me, you seem to believe you understand me much better than I understand myself. That belief in the ability to read people's minds and know their motivations with basically no information is very much magical thinking. There is a simple way to know what people are thinking--listen to what they say and believe them. That doesn't take magic. I recommend that non-magical thinking as you interact with people in the future....Show more →
Welcome back to the "other" side of Leica M. Just like Sony, seems wherever there is a happy group of Leica M users it's a target for forum marauders. And thankfully, I happily shoot two of the largest targets on the internet
Fred Miranda wrote:
I thought about this for a while and believe it may be the best solution. I am always hesitant to fragment the forum any further as we need high activity for a new board to succeed. The alternative board was super active in the past because it had Sony as the main actor. We were adapting all sort of lenses on Sony and therefore the "alternative" name made a lot of sense.
At that time, it was really the "alternative" to Canon and Nikon SLRs.
Now that Sony and Fuji have their own dedicated boards, most of the discussions here are about legacy lenses that can be adapted to Leica or compatible Leica lenses adapted to other cameras. Therefore calling it "Leica & Alternative Gear" makes more sense for our board today.
pmeheut wrote:
...
people dedicated to their craft tend to be very particular about their tools.
And people who are not dedicated practitioners can purchase the same particular tools for their own needs. That doesn't diminish or negate the tool's value in the practitioner's hands.
One can buy premium Arches Platine, St Cuthburt Somerset, Canson Edition, Fabriano, Rives or Stonehenge papers even though Strathmore 400 might suffice... However, if one doesn't know the value of the tool, one probably doesn't know the value of the craft...
Going to leaves these words from Sir Francis Bacon here for thought. Still relevant today it seems.
The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate.
Most Leica M cameras today are finished in black chrome or black anodized with a matte satin surface, but the exclusively limited Leica M10-R features a unique glossy black paint finish – akin to many iconic Leicas of years past. This classic look might be more delicate compared to modern equivalents, but with time it develops its own unique patina and character.
Many photographers treasure these signs of wear that reveal the brass on the top plate, bottom cover and dials after intensive use. Now, the Leica M10-R too will expose these authentic characteristics over time. Its unique patina bearing witness to the passing of time—capturing more than just events but telling its very own story.
This exclusive design variant of the Leica M10-R combines all the modern technology associated with the state-of-the-art 40 megapixel camera with classic design elements. In addition to its glossy black paint finish, the top cap features the famous Leica script and "Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Germany" engraving. Both the ISO and shutter speed dials feature characteristic cross patterned knurling, and the release button has a silver glossy chrome finish. These special details hearken to the rare black glossy classics Leica M3 and Leica M4, which are incredibly sought-after to this day. The emblematic red Leica dot has also deliberately been omitted for the most stealthy and iconic look.
I am curious about the screw on the front of a number of M digital M’s, where the red dot used to be. Does this make it easy for users to calibrate their own rangefinder? For example can you focus using live-view and then use the screw on the front to adjust the rangefinder so it is perfectly calibrated?
andrewd01 wrote:
I am curious about the screw on the front of a number of M digital M’s, where the red dot used to be. Does this make it easy for users to calibrate their own rangefinder? For example can you focus using live-view and then use the screw on the front to adjust the rangefinder so it is perfectly calibrated?
it's the vertical alignment adjustment (under the screw)
andrewd01 wrote:
I am curious about the screw on the front of a number of M digital M’s, where the red dot used to be. Does this make it easy for users to calibrate their own rangefinder? For example can you focus using live-view and then use the screw on the front to adjust the rangefinder so it is perfectly calibrated?
It's for the RF’s vertical adjustment. With models with a screw instead of the red dot, it's just easier to access. However, removing the red dot gives access to the same calibration screw. It only aligns the rangefinder vertically though.
For the horizontal RF adjustment, which calibrates your lenses distance to match the rangefinder’s, you need to use a different adjustment screw.
This one is much easier to access: The roller on the end of the rangefinder coupling arm is held on with an eccentric screw. As you mentioned, this is the adjustment screw and you could use in conjunction with live view to aid the calibration process. (If your rangefinder is equipped with live view)
Fred Miranda wrote:
For the horizontal RF adjustment, which calibrates your lenses distance to match the rangefinder’s, you need to use a different adjustment screw.
This one is much easier to access: The roller on the end of the rangefinder coupling arm is held on with an eccentric screw. As you mentioned, this is the adjustment screw and you could use in conjunction with live view to aid the calibration process. (If your rangefinder is equipped with live view)
Even without liveview, using a 50mm lens and adjusting to infinity works well.
. Never made afterwards in any other Leica M. 
