p.1 #1 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
The Leica growth and hype over the last 10 years has been undeniable, driven by bearded young men with flat caps wearing M bodies on short straps like necklaces while documenting every coffee break on YouTube.
But for photographers getting started with Leica M — where should they start? Does the mythical "Leica look" with bokeh, light fall-off, center sharpness, micro-contrast, etc. of the lenses lead the way, or is it the Leica M rangefinder body and its particular way of shooting/seeing that marches upfront?
I fully understand people who say "body first" because they want that rangefinder experience. They might be street photographers who want to use zone focusing, and they care less if there is a Voigtländer, Ttartisan, Light Lens Lab, 7Artisans, or TTArtisans in front. Ultimate sharpness or rendering is never the primary goal — capturing the moment is.
Then there is the Leica lens enthusiast. It is all about the glass. And the manual focusing experience. It is about carefully crafting the photograph vs. capturing the moment, and they particularly enjoy the rendering.
Some people are lucky enough to have deep pockets and can load up on both Leica M bodies and lenses to maximize the combo.
I am curious — which camp do you fall into, and why? If you were to start over with Leica, would you invest in a Leica lens first, even shooting on your current mirrorless platform, and eventually end up on a Leica M or even SL body? Put it on a Nikon Zf even? Or would you happily spend the money on a digital M first and be happy with that — say, a Voigtländer 35/2 Ultron up front — and call it there?
p.1 #2 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I'm a rangefinder person. If tomorrow someone build something as good as a M or better, or maybe different with its own personality, I will consider it. If it is not as outrageously expensive as Leica, I'll be the first in the queue to buy it.
When it comes to lenses, I've had the best M and R lenses for 40 years and so many of them.
Now, I'm using Voigtlander and I'm perfectly happy: I see no difference, in fact some are even better, they are usually lighter, smaller, very well built and 3 to 5 times cheaper.
I use gear to shoot pictures. I like the experience to be nice, to use tools I'm at ease with. And the M is a great tool. But that's all. No mysticism.
P.S: I say it often but I will repeat it. When we were shooting film, I could see the difference between Leica glass and other brands. Sometimes it was more than obvious. Nowadays all the brands can produce excellent lenses and post-processing make 99% of the differences moot anyway.
p.1 #4 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I guess I am a systems person with a unified view of why I chose what equipment I enjoy and purchase.
M first. Leica digital and analog with the same form factor workflow and lenses. Each at the top of their targeted space. No other system on the market can match Leica in that.
With the SL3 I am driven by the APO-SL lenses which I have an affinity for. I want the best platform for those lenses. Without those lenses I wouldn't be in an SL system at all.
Value is important to me, but I am not price sensitive or restricted.
p.1 #5 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I would to start with a film M rather than digital; this gets back to the core experience, avoiding the modern mind-trap off seeking perfection.
A first generation M6 and 35/1.4 classic Nokton will ease you in gently, then later you can bring in digital and clean modern aspherical lens.
p.1 #6 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I purchased a pair of M3s decades ago, but used mostly third party lenses. Since, have moved along the ‘M’ film body path and rely upon a combination of Leica APO and collapsible lenses, Voigtlander APO and fast lenses, Zeiss classic lenses and a few M-Hexanon lenses. From my perspective, Leica didn’t compete well within the digital computer imaging space, but it did offer some interesting cameras, like their range of Monochrom cameras. I’m currently hard pressed to come up with a reason to buy a digital Leica when so many other brands offer so much technology with ever better glass.
p.1 #7 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I answer from personal experience how it worked for me: I started off with Leica M lenses years before I bought my first Leica M camera, the Leica M6 classic. I purchased my first Leica 50/2.0 Vers. V lens for a decent deal from a friend of mine who also started using Sony MLC in 2014. At the time, Sony didn't offer a lot of E-mount choices, and often people bought the first or second Sony E-mount camera versions to work specifically with third party lenses using adapters. I liked the small E-mount camera size (especially the first generation with smaller handgrip was great here which I am still using to this day) but also wanted a small but high quality lens size - so this is when I found myself exploring rangefinder M lenses. I had a blast with my Leica 50/2.0 Summicron lens attached to my Sony A7R and soon the Leica 35/2.0 Vers. IV lens found its home attached to the same camera. It should take 2 more years when I was gifted a Beseler 45XT enlarger and set up my own darkroom and needed a better film camera. Since I already owned two Leica lenses I really liked, I decided to purchase for $1400 an EX rated used Leica M6 classic with original box (I am using this camera to this day, too). It should take until 2019 before I purchased my first digital Leica M, the Leica M-E 240 (also still my main camera to date).
If someone is not sure about going with Leica these days, and reason why I went with M-lenses first is no longer present since MLC brands offer now a large variety of lenses in their lens environment, my advice is the following: try a cheaper used Leica M or LTM camera first with one lens with focal length of your main preference. Leica IIIc (for LTM) or M4-2 and M5 come in mind here which I see having the best current price/quality ratio in the used market.
p.1 #8 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
If we're talking about M, and factoring everything that I know now. I would actually tell anyone thinking about it to just save up and get the best lens and then best body you can afford together right off the bat. Max out your budget away so you don't keep adding unnecessary peripheral gear under the guise of "this is reasonable". The whole starter/trainer/working up your way thing is just designed to make you waste more time and money in the end, best to skip all that.
p.1 #9 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I owned several Leica lenses before I bought an M body, an M9. Neat camera, but my brain and the rangefinder focus system didn’t get along. I still have M and R lenses and shoot a Q3 43. I wish that some of the wide Ms worked on Sony sensors or that the MEV cost less than my first car, but life is short, and there are many other camera systems.
Jim
p.1 #11 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
For me it is the camera, for sure, that makes me stay with this M-system. Be it RF or EVF based, there is a scarcity of these, film or digital. So if one wants an M-mount native camera, then Leica is the obvious choice, I guess, especially for digital (I don't think Pixii is a real contender at this point in time).
As for the M-mount lenses, there are zillions...and still coming. And if one needs to magnify at 100% a picture to see the (whatever - bokeh or sharpness or...) differences, then everything is already said and proven. There might be exceptions to this, but at a cost - I mean very specific Leica lenses.
So if I would be given a lens available in E (Sony) and M (Leica) mount (say a 50mm Voigtlander APO-Lanthar) and be asked to pick a camera for it, I would go for the Leica, just for the "experience". I do enjoy using a Leica camera, (almost) regardless of the lens attached to it.
p.1 #12 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
My journey started with travelling through old towns. These older towns on the verge of becoming ghost towns cried to me of shooting in B&W. When I returned home I bought an M9M with 3 Zeiss ZM's. 25,35 and 50. I found out shortly there was the possibility of IR shooting and I tested the ZM but found a light leak in all 3 due to the mount(only effected IR). I returned the 25 and 50 and got a 50 lux. The 35 was eventually sold.
The M9M became my full time B&W camera. I enjoy the experience of a camera that does B&W only. When the M246 came out less than a year later I added it. Next came the 24 Elmar and 90 APO. Over time 135 APO, 15 Voigtlander (long gone), M10M, 16-18-21 and 35 LUX with close focus.
In hindsight would I do anything different? No. Start with M body and a couple of lenses, then fill in the kit over time. Though I think adding a color M along the way should have been looked at because I always paired up my dslr with the monochrom which meant carrying 2 sets of lenses.
Although my M lens kit is complete, the Voigtlander APOs has me looking at a full frame color M or SL. The SL is tempting as you can use M lenses and the SL has those 6 prime APO's but the SL would compete with my mirrorless Canon and GFX.
One can always say there is never too many tools to use, but when it comes to cameras and lenses you can only shoot 1 body and 1 lens at a time. So as I ponder again on past decisions what might I do moving forward having knowledge from what I did in the past. I still think I made the right decision on an M body and a couple of lenses to start.
That would be mine, I suppose.