p.2 #1 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
There is a saying about lenses "Size, Quality, Price, pick any two." While the Leica name and German manufacture certainly adds to the price of Leica M lenses, their size is a major cost driver. It costs more to make a quality small lens than to make a quality larger lens. On an M body I like to see my subjects (and what is outside the frame lines) so small is better in my use. Other makers make some great lenses so for mirrorless users using m-mount lenses there are more cost effective choices.
p.2 #2 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
Thanks for all the input so far. It was very interesting.
I asked the question because I have been thinking about buying (back) the Summilux-M 50/1.4 ASPH. It has a fond place in my heart and memory as one of my favorite lenses of all time. I first got it 25 years ago, and at the time, it was surely the best 50mm around. I shot it on a M6 TTL and M3. Lots of fond memories. But slowly I also realize a lot of surpressed feelings of frustration, missed shot, uninteresting shots. I have also tried it again on various Sony bodies and Leica M10. And as much as I adore Leica M, what it stands for, my time with the kit, and much more, I think I have arrived to the conclusion that I am not really a Leica rangefinder person. It doesn't come natural to me. I don't zone focus or do street photography. I don't derive pleasure from owning things, i.e. collecting M glass or camera bodies - use it or lose it, has always been my mantra.
It has been a journey of reflection and my romantic-photography-voice arguing with my practical-photography-voice, and I think I have arrived to some clarity finally! In short, buy camera gear for the photographer you are, not the one you wish you were. Let the good memories of 50'lux be just that - memories. If I need a fast 50 - get the Sony 50/1.2 GM for my Sony system. I will let my Leica wants be satisfied by getting a Leica Q3 43 (I'm not a 28mm either, tried it with the Q2, Q2M and Q3 - not doing that again).
p.2 #3 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
You know, I really thought I was a M body person. I love the size of the body and the rangefinder experience. I used them for years, mostly happily, sometimes not, especially when dealing with rangefinders or lenses that needed calibration.
For the last year I've been shooting with a Nikon Zf with adapted M lenses and native Z-mount Voigtlanders, and I think I've found my happy place. I still miss the size of M bodies, but the experience of shooting beautifully made manual lenses with Nikon's excellent manual focus aids is every bit as engaging and joyful to me.
p.2 #4 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
patotts wrote:
In short, buy camera gear for the photographer you are, not the one you wish you were.
A nice mantra, but on the other hand it can be good to spend time with a system that forces you to be a different photographer.
When I first started shooting film again three years ago, I already had a pretty good set of LTM and M-mount lenses but had never used a rangefinder camera. I was using them on my Sony with a close-focus adapter. I bought a Canon P as a cheap rangefinder to see if I would like the experience. It definitely changed my approach to photography: for one thing with most/all LTM lenses you can't focus closer than 1 meter so my close-focus habits went out the window. And while I often shot those lenses wide open or close to it on my Sony, I ended up shooting mainly stopped down on the rangefinder. I found I was taking different photographs, in a different style. At first I felt annoyed but gradually saw value to it as it certainly got me out of a rut and added diversity across my photos.
I ended up buying some film SLRs, but eventually sold them because they encouraged me to drift back to the same style and approach I used with my Sony. Now I'm mainly shooting rangefinders, scale-focus cameras, a TLR, pinhole cameras, and a point-and-shoot film camera. All of which force me to adapt to their constraints. I still have my own style, but I think I've become a better photographer by working with these cameras that force me to get out of my comfort zone. A more disciplined person could do all this without buying cameras that impose limitations, but I'm a fundamentally lazy guy and sometimes an external force is required for me to change.
p.2 #5 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I love the M system solely because of their magical lenses. Both modern and especially vintage. And not just Leica. There are thousands of excellent LTM lenses in the world. And the M camera is simply the highest-quality way to use them.
Without these lenses, I would continue to use digital cameras from Canon, Sony, or Hasselblad. Unfortunately, Hasselblad's medium format lenses have undergone fundamental changes; the signature 3D look is gone, leaving only sharpness and color. That's not enough for me. M system lenses give me this magic.
p.2 #6 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I love the M system solely because of their magical lenses. Both modern and especially vintage. And not just Leica. There are thousands of excellent LTM lenses in the world. And the M camera is simply the highest-quality way to use them.
Without these lenses, I would continue to use digital cameras from Canon, Sony, or Hasselblad. Unfortunately, Hasselblad's medium format lenses have undergone fundamental changes; the signature 3D look is gone, leaving only sharpness and color. That's not enough for me. M system lenses give me this magic.
p.2 #7 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
As mentioned already, it’s the RF experience that arguably sets it from the rest. One can always go in with the M system and go 3rd party lens at the same time. There is a certain prestige to having it all in the ecosystem. For what it’s worth, ive always been very superficial at putting together the Nikon ecosystem that way too…all native lenses and flashes, etc, but 3rd party was a little spotty since Nikon wasn’t always an open system.
With Leica’s luxury brand, it’s very much like other luxury brands, yadda yadda…. But Wetzlar did not get here overnight, these are built over generations. To go back on topic a bit or off to another topic - I’ll go on a limb and say, my eyes rarely, if at ever get pulled into any of the Leica ambassador work online. Some of the work that i find impressive have been just some random guy shooting a M body with 3rd party lenses, like Paul C. Smith from New Zealand who is/was doing wonderful things with photographic tools, time, effort.
p.2 #8 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
The 50lux may perform well on Sony. The 50cron certainly does. Mine doesn’t get the use that it should, but it always performs well, and focusing is pretty straightforward, zoomed in.
The Q3 43 is great but has more a look of its own, rather than a classic Leica look. AF performs well, and manual focusing is also easy.
patotts wrote:
Thanks for all the input so far. It was very interesting.
I asked the question because I have been thinking about buying (back) the Summilux-M 50/1.4 ASPH. It has a fond place in my heart and memory as one of my favorite lenses of all time. I first got it 25 years ago, and at the time, it was surely the best 50mm around. I shot it on a M6 TTL and M3. Lots of fond memories. But slowly I also realize a lot of surpressed feelings of frustration, missed shot, uninteresting shots. I have also tried it again on various Sony bodies and Leica M10. And as much as I adore Leica M, what it stands for, my time with the kit, and much more, I think I have arrived to the conclusion that I am not really a Leica rangefinder person. It doesn't come natural to me. I don't zone focus or do street photography. I don't derive pleasure from owning things, i.e. collecting M glass or camera bodies - use it or lose it, has always been my mantra.
It has been a journey of reflection and my romantic-photography-voice arguing with my practical-photography-voice, and I think I have arrived to some clarity finally! In short, buy camera gear for the photographer you are, not the one you wish you were. Let the good memories of 50'lux be just that - memories. If I need a fast 50 - get the Sony 50/1.2 GM for my Sony system. I will let my Leica wants be satisfied by getting a Leica Q3 43 (I'm not a 28mm either, tried it with the Q2, Q2M and Q3 - not doing that again).
p.2 #9 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
rscheffler wrote:
Because it's not always about performance per dollar spent. There are intangibles that for some are enough to justify buying Leica lenses to use on a Leica body. And not just because the Leica name is on them.
The Thypoch lenses are optically very impressive and some are very, very similar in performance and character to the Leica lenses they seem to be designed to emulate. But while Thypoch did a great job optically, some will argue the physical design of the lens housings/bodies ruined what could have been a great user experience. Inconsistent aperture spacing and the odd combination of third, half and full stop increments. The visual DOF 'feature' is one of those 'looks great on paper and in the display case' design decisions that also seems to sacrifice optimal placement of the manual focusing ring on some models. And they're relatively large for rangefinder system lenses (rangefinder blockage considerations).
I was going to post earlier that the extra 5% one gains by spending ballpark 5-10x more for the Leica equivalent is to fully benefit from Leica's refinement of their M system design and user experience philosophy over many decades. It's not a great value for the dollar based on the technical end results, considering other options currently on the market, but it's the only option for the full Leica experience. I know some consider this complete rubbish, and that's fine.
Therefore my vote based on hindsight experience is buy once, buy both, as someone else already posted. That said, buying just the lenses and adapting to other systems, or buying a Leica body and using other brand lenses on it, is not wrong, either. Just different paths....Show more →
p.2 #10 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
When I was a younger person, I was living in Japan. The Bic Camera in Ikebukuro had a floor (I think it was on the 3rd floor) dedicated to camera oddities/geekery: large format, enlargers and...rangefinders. They had display models of all the relevant current release bodies: Bessa R2/R3's, Leica MP/M7 and Zeiss Ikon ZM. You could fondle them all. The Leicas felt the best, but on my teacher's salary, I didn't think spending a month's+ wages on a camera was a good use of resources.
I really wanted a quality rangefinder body. I was thankful that there were options beyond Leica. I ended up with a used Zeiss Ikon ZM. It has served me well to this day.
All of this is to say, there was a time when there were practical cheaper options to enter the world of rangefinders. Given the current used prices of Ikons/Bessas, I personally wouldn't recommend them.
Leica lenses are good. Some of them are even worth their asking price. There are quite a few excellent third party lenses. But, the rangefinder shooting experience (especially on film), is the reason for being. And Leica is the only game in town for that anymore. So, my vote is for a Leica body.
p.2 #11 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
If you're just getting into Leica to sport a red dot, get whatever. Maybe a nice hat.
But presumably, someone who is interested in Leica already knows why they're interested. They should prioritize the thing it is that they're looking to achieve. If it's a rangefinder shooting experience, get a body and a cheaper lens. If it's a specific lens, get that and whatever body makes the most sense to host it.
p.2 #12 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
RomanMF wrote:
So you have money to burn. Cool.
That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. But the attitude isn’t necessary. What other people choose to spend their money on really isn’t anyone else’s concern. Saying someone has “money to burn” misses the point. People prioritize different things, and for me photography is a hobby that brings enjoyment, benefits my mental health, and creates memories with my family. That’s worth far more to me than maximizing performance per dollar.
I don’t expect a financial return from my photography. That’s what my investments and retirement accounts are for. Hobbies don’t need to justify themselves with a balance sheet. They just need to add value to your life, and photography has done that for me in ways that are well worth the expense.
p.2 #13 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
OffTrail wrote:
If you're just getting into Leica to sport a red dot, get whatever. Maybe a nice hat.
But presumably, someone who is interested in Leica already knows why they're interested. They should prioritize the thing it is that they're looking to achieve. If it's a rangefinder shooting experience, get a body and a cheaper lens. If it's a specific lens, get that and whatever body makes the most sense to host it.
To me, it’s neither the rangefinder nor the red dot. It’s small and excellent lenses, zone focusing and easy manual focusing. There are not many options in that regard. Adapting M lenses to Canon or Nikon works for me. Some other combos work as well, mostly in MFT (with a few Olympus lenses with MF focus clutch) and Fuji, but those are on their way out.
p.2 #14 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I like a nice body. I initially got a Q3, and loved the camera but couldn't stomach that much for one camera so was actually able to trade it at a minor profit for cash plus an M10 and a 28 Ultron and 50 1.5. I really enjoyed the ranger finder experience but also the process of just distilling it down to bare necessities. That was about 3 years ago and now have an M8 and Q2 Reporter. Love them both but eventually can see myself switching out the M8 for a more modern M and go whole hog for a 11p. In short, for me the body is the experience. I just spent 10 days on a trip where I used those two 95% of the trip and didn't go into the menus once. My only issue was trying to decide which body I wanted to carry around. Perfectly happy with Voigtlander and Thypoch.
p.2 #15 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
Surfnsun wrote:
That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it. But the attitude isn’t necessary. What other people choose to spend their money on really isn’t anyone else’s concern. Saying someone has “money to burn” misses the point. People prioritize different things, and for me photography is a hobby that brings enjoyment, benefits my mental health, and creates memories with my family. That’s worth far more to me than maximizing performance per dollar.
I don’t expect a financial return from my photography. That’s what my investments and retirement accounts are for. Hobbies don’t need to justify themselves with a balance sheet. They just need to add value to your life, and photography has done that for me in ways that are well worth the expense. ...Show more →
This is such a weird response. Why are you taking offense to the idea that you have money to burn? I'm not your wife. I don't care how you spend your money. Spending the additional money on Leica lenses doesn't often make rational sense. Someone from the outside looking in would struggle to understand it. Who cares! If it makes you feel better to have a slightly smaller lens, or for the lens branding to match the camera branding, and you have enough money that the absurd cost difference is not an issue for you, GO FOR IT!
I just spent $10K on an additional camera kit that I didn't need. Why? Because I wanted to and I had money to burn.
p.2 #16 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
Well, you really got that out of shape. Typical. Let me introduce you to my ignore list because I don’t bother wasting my time arguing with people that just get so upset over such silly things.
RomanMF wrote:
This is such a weird response. Why are you taking offense to the idea that you have money to burn? I'm not your wife. I don't care how you spend your money. Spending the additional money on Leica lenses doesn't often make rational sense. Someone from the outside looking in would struggle to understand it. Who cares! If it makes you feel better to have a slightly smaller lens, or for the lens branding to match the camera branding, and you have enough money that the absurd cost difference is not an issue for you, GO FOR IT!
I just spent $10K on an additional camera kit that I didn't need. Why? Because I wanted to and I had money to burn....Show more →
p.2 #17 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
For me it's body first. I bought a used M10 Monochrome because I wanted to shoot B&W 35mm images without the hassle of developing film. My first M lens was a used Voigtlander 35mm APO.
p.2 #18 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
I started with a Leica M 2 and a 50 collaspible cron in 78. I have always used Leicas for my personal work and have used Topcon when I started in 71 then nikon then Canon and now Sony for professional work. Occasionally 2 1/4 as well. But the leica usage slows me down makes me think and as a street photographer first it does not freeze up people like other cameras do. I tried the voigts hated the fringing have on thypoch now a 75 the rest all leica glass wate which I might be the only one who loves it 24 28 35 and 50 luxes I live in low light a 90 cron and the 135 apo. I have gone the eV1 now I hated tryinga sony with the bad ergonomics I want light and small and no not rich, I was orphaned at 16 photography saved my life, but a working photographer my adult life. But I buy smart mostly used.
p.2 #19 · Are you a Leica camera or Leica lens person?
Lenses, but that's true for every company. I am picky about specific performance aspects and prices on cameras, but they're all just a means to an end. Adaptability rules there.
