Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Leica M Film Cameras (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Not quite getting it (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167307)

colker 01-14-2019 17:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioneer (Post 2861523)
Besides, it all comes down to the film and the lens. The rest is just a box with a lens mount so buy the box you can afford.

Yes. I would even say it comes down to film and shooting w/ talent, vision and passion. If a picture is strong, gear disappears.
If you can´t afford a rangefinder buy a cheap slr.

Richard G 01-14-2019 17:30

I agree the M6 is a great camera, and I like the comment that without the MP currently available the M6 would be even more expensive. It was my main camera when my children were small and it is perfect with the compact 35 Summicron. I used it last weekend and the meter is very good. Having used manual a lot with the digital Ms I found I was second guessing the meter a lot, depending on the scene. Ten years ago I got into incident metering more. Some scenes I got to thinking I better use the hand-held light meter, rather than trust the matched M6 VF red diode triangles. Weird thing is, the answer to that is mostly no. If you just slavishly balanced those two little triangles you could shoot twenty rolls without a bad exposure. It's probably why the M7 is so good. Still might get one of those....

Sumarongi 01-14-2019 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by colker (Post 2861622)
You made a comparison. I made another. My point is clear.

We're not disagreeing then —— my point is also clear I think :D

I'm saying, a good suit can be worn three, four or even more decades. Heck, I'm even sometimes wearing my grandfather's winter coat made before WWII, and my daughters love some gowns made for their great-grandmother during the 1920s!

It's «sustainability» what I'm talking about. Yes, sustainable products cost more at the point of time you purchase them, than «ephemeral» (crappy «hi-tech» usually) products. But in the end, often after the first decade already, the sustainable products have been a lot cheaper than the obsolescent product that you were forced to replace meanwhile.

Ko.Fe. 01-14-2019 18:35

My 250$ paid for new EOS is measuring light at any time.
Nikkormat - move shutter level a little and it measures.

True mechanical Leica with handheld meter are less worse. Just more space. But I could measure light every time it changes. Without wasting frame.
In my rangefinder photography I could measure light ten times during one hour in ten different places and take one picture. I measure every time light changes if I care for exposure. In advance. Because, I'm finding it too slow to measure the light by TTL manual metering, frame and focus. I sometimes have only few seconds to focus and frame.
Clunking with > 0 <, just no time for this.

Don't know how bad it is with M6, MP, but Bessa R would often get fooled and R2M just keeps on blinking something like +2, until I get exposure right by S16.

steveyork 01-15-2019 07:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonmanjiro (Post 2860310)
But, magic or no magic, it is also a better camera than a Leica M7 IMO (I've owned both)...

Fifteen or so years ago, when I shot rangefinders exclusively, I tested a ZI at a store. I owned an M7 and MP at the time, but something about the rangefinder patch of the ZI was disconcerting. Your eye had to be centered properly or ... I forget. But what great eye relief. Anyway, all my Leica rangefinders are gone except an M3 and dual range Summicron. More of an SLR guy now, and have been for many years.

steveyork 01-15-2019 07:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by colker (Post 2860306)
I´ve been around and the cult of camera gear is nonsense.

So true. But you have to "been around," as you say, to reach that conclusion. Some people never get out of their own neighborhood.

steveyork 01-15-2019 07:56

Over the last 15 years, Leica new film cameras and lenses have probably increased in price by 80-100%. When I purchased an MP when they initially came out in circa 2003 it cost $2595 US (and I thought that was boatload). What are they now -- $4500+? So as the price of new goes up, it drags the used prices too. But it's interesting that digital Ms haven't dented more the demand for film Ms.

Huss 01-15-2019 09:37

the price of the Leica R9 has also skyrocketed. Going rate is now over $1200. I paid 1/2 that less than a year ago. R8 has not been affected so. Yet.

colker 01-15-2019 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveyork (Post 2861787)
Over the last 15 years, Leica new film cameras and lenses have probably increased in price by 80-100%. When I purchased an MP when they initially came out in circa 2003 it cost $2595 US (and I thought that was boatload). What are they now -- $4500+? So as the price of new goes up, it drags the used prices too. But it's interesting that digital Ms haven't dented more the demand for film Ms.

Leica prices are the kingdom of excess.

I like the cameras. They exude style.. but the cult of camera gear hides mediocrity in picture taking.
If you have to talk about the bokeh then the image svcks.
Photographer´s style is way more interesting than camera style.

colker 01-15-2019 09:45

We need new rangefinders. New SLRs. Prices for used camera gear has gone stupid.

Deardorff38 01-15-2019 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by colker (Post 2861823)
We need new rangefinders. New SLRs. Prices for used camera gear has gone stupid.

No we don't. There are thousands of M2,M3,M4,M5 etc, Nikon F & Canon Fs out there. Lots are being used. Who's going to buy the 'new' overpriced film cameras? More people who collect cameras as a hobby & drool over the next 50mm f 1.0 ?

css9450 01-15-2019 10:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by colker (Post 2861823)
Prices for used camera gear has gone stupid.

No, you just have to cherry-pick the bargains that are available. Leicas are stupidly expensive, but mainstream SLRs like the Canon AE-1 and Nikon FG or their 1980s AF equivalents can be had for a fraction of their selling price. In 1996 I paid over a thousand dollars for my Nikon N90S and today I can buy lightly-used ones for $50.

Huss 01-15-2019 10:43

Just bought a like new Nikon ZoomTouch 800 for $15 shipped. This was Nikon’s best p&s camera with ED glass, multi point phase focus etc. Was $500 in 1992.

colker 01-15-2019 10:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2861840)
Just bought a like new Nikon Autozoom 800 for
$15 shipped. This was Nikon’s best p&s camera with ED glass, multi point phase focus etc. Was $500 in 1992.

Awesome. Instead of paying 1500 dollars for an obvious Contax T2.
Congrats ..

colker 01-15-2019 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by css9450 (Post 2861831)
No, you just have to cherry-pick the bargains that are available. Leicas are stupidly expensive, but mainstream SLRs like the Canon AE-1 and Nikon FG or their 1980s AF equivalents can be had for a fraction of their selling price. In 1996 I paid over a thousand dollars for my Nikon N90S and today I can buy lightly-used ones for $50.

You are right.. right now i am enamored w/ rangefinders and the options are dim.

Maybe a Canon 7.

It´s ludicrous to pay 1000 dollars for a Zeiss ZM lens when a Nikon 50mm 1.4 will cost me 150 dollars.

Anyway..

colker 01-15-2019 10:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deardorff38 (Post 2861828)
No we don't. There are thousands of M2,M3,M4,M5 etc, Nikon F & Canon Fs out there. Lots are being used. Who's going to buy the 'new' overpriced film cameras? More people who collect cameras as a hobby & drool over the next 50mm f 1.0 ?

Overpriced is an Xpan.

Cosina should restart selling their RFs.

Hiho Cracker 01-15-2019 16:34

I am shocked by how cheap a lot of film gear is now. With everyone chasing Contax T3's or whatever, I recently bought a very tidy Canon F1n for a hundred dollars, plus shipping. Seems almost unused. Also someone sent me a Canon P free as a rear lens cap when I bought a lens. I don't think anyone can say that decent film gear is going to break the bank in this day and age.

jonmanjiro 01-15-2019 17:02

Not quite getting it
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by steveyork (Post 2861776)
something about the rangefinder patch of the ZI was disconcerting. Your eye had to be centered properly or ... I forget. But what great eye relief.

That's true. It doesn't take long to adjust though. The rangefinder patch disappears when your eye moves off center precisely because the eye piece is large and has great eye relief. Your eye can't move off center very far with an M7 because the eye piece is a lot smaller.

splitimageview 01-15-2019 17:22

This is like the Contax G series. The G2 is better than the G1, but they both have very narrow exit pupils. So if you pull up the camera to your eye quickly, the eye may be off-center very slightly, and the viewfinder can literally black out. With practice it becomes second nature to align things so this doesn't happen, but it can be disconcerting/problematic if you're used to other cameras.

People that haven't experience this with cameras, might be familiar with it when using some binoculars with narrow exit pupils.

maigo 01-15-2019 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2861840)
Just bought a like new Nikon ZoomTouch 800 for $15 shipped. This was Nikon's best p&s camera with ED glass, multi point phase focus etc. Was $500 in 1992.

Just read the specs on this beast.
17.6oz/499grams. Yikes, that is a P&S brick!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pyeh 01-15-2019 18:06

The other thing about the ZI ZM rangefinder patch is that it doesn't follow the framelines when thy correct for parallax. The patch stays centre in the viewfinder. The Bessas do this too. It slightly alters my focus-and-recompose perception.

Much as I like these Cosina-made rangefinders I think the immobile patch shows a lack of sophistication compared to M's.

barnwulf 01-15-2019 19:53

A few years back I bought a MP thinking that it was the ultimate Leica. It was very nice but I had to sell my M6 in order to buy the MP. After shooting with the MP for awhile I thought that I should just have kept my M6 since it was pretty much did the same thing. I was sorry that I had made that switch. It was a learning experience. I still have several Leicas but I mostly shoot digital now. - jim

Huss 01-15-2019 21:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by barnwulf (Post 2861974)
A few years back I bought a MP thinking that it was the ultimate Leica. It was very nice but I had to sell my M6 in order to buy the MP. After shooting with the MP for awhile I thought that I should just have kept my M6 since it was pretty much did the same thing. I was sorry that I had made that switch. It was a learning experience. I still have several Leicas but I mostly shoot digital now. - jim

I feel the same way about the Nikon FE2 and FM3a. One is about $120, the other $600. To me they are the same thing when you actually use them.

Huss 01-15-2019 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by maigo (Post 2861946)
Just read the specs on this beast.
17.6oz/499grams. Yikes, that is a P&S brick!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A brick? That's just a wee pebble compared to my Rollei QZ35W P&S @ 670gms.

Out to Lunch 01-16-2019 02:30

Well, it is supply and demand, stupid or not: in 2009, when I bought my ZI demand must have been low since it was offered at a discounted price: some $ 1,950 for the camera + the 1.5/50 + hood. The only thing I don't like about the camera is that it can be hard to read the meter output in the viewfinder under bright light conditions.

colker 01-16-2019 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huss (Post 2861989)
I feel the same way about the Nikon FE2 and FM3a. One is about $120, the other $600. To me they are the same thing when you actually use them.

Never shot the FE. Have one that was given me broken. I did shoot a lot w/ the FM. I would leave the F3 at home and use the FM full time.

It´s the uncomplicated camera. And light. Nikon realized the early SLR was all some photographers wanted and made the FM series. They made it small, light w/ a behind the lens meter. Anything else gets in the way.

dwojr 01-16-2019 06:01

Would love to see a review of the Nikon Huss. Looks like an interesting camera.

splitimageview 01-16-2019 06:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by pyeh (Post 2861948)
The other thing about the ZI ZM rangefinder patch is that it doesn't follow the framelines when thy correct for parallax. The patch stays centre in the viewfinder. The Bessas do this too. It slightly alters my focus-and-recompose perception.

Much as I like these Cosina-made rangefinders I think the immobile patch shows a lack of sophistication compared to M's.

This adds a lot of complication and likely cost, I can see why they skipped it.

The Contax G series does the same thing, the viewfinder adjusts for parallax but the focus point stays in the same place.

justins7 01-16-2019 06:22

I sold my 20-year old M6 two years ago — and now greatly regret it. I was sort of out of photography at the time, but have since gotten back into it. Prices these days definitely seem to be twice what I sold mine for (sadly).

I think there's been an uptick in hipster demand for film cameras (anecdotally), and the M6 is one of the most useable M's (due to the meter). I keep seeing bearded men in their 20's walking around NYC with film cameras. This is the type of person who bought mine, and probably they are fueling the price increase. (The other day I walked into deli and two college types were fondling their screw mount Leicas and an M4.) I'm glad there's a new generation learning about film and manual cameras, though, however small the numbers might actually be.

David Hughes 01-16-2019 09:08

Hmmm,, it used to be FAST meaning Focus, Aperture, Shutter and Take but now it just seems to be Fondle...

Regards, David

Huss 01-16-2019 09:28

Nothing wrong with fondling. that means the mfgs did it right and made the gear desirable and enjoyable to use. the cameras i fondle the most are the ones i use the most. it’s y i got rid of stuff like my Canon P and Bessa R3a - I just did not find them enjoyable to use compared to Leicas and thus did not use them. Interestingly price does not seem to determine this. I really enjoy using gear like my Zorki 4 Pinkoktober ,Agfa Optima 1535 and Nikonos V.

steveyork 01-16-2019 11:15

Leica are expensive but they have a strong used market. Purchase carefully and you can probably make a little money if you sell later. When I largely got out of rangefinders in circa 2012, I made money on just about everything that I had purchased new some ten or so years earlier. So yes, a big wad of cash as an up front investment, but you can mostly get it back if you don't want the stuff.

justins7 01-16-2019 13:12

I bought my M6 circa 1996 for around $2500 —*a hefty sum back then (and now) which took me a while to earn. When I sold it for about a third that price I thought that wasn't bad, considering it was 20 years old and film seemed to be on the way out. Now I feel dumb for selling it; film isn't dead, and now I realize how attached I was to that camera, since it went traveling with me on many adventures. Oh well. :bang:

I've been shooting with my beat-up M3 and two Kiev's lately, so all is well. My screw-mounts (IIIC and IIIF) are both troubled, so they'll just have to be fondled.:rolleyes:

Dante_Stella 01-16-2019 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-9 (Post 2860331)
I have to agree with your comments @colker

My F5 was cheap. I watched the prices drop off a cliff, and now I own one and use it more than any other camera I have EVER used including those Leicas.

It's heavy, kind of ugly, and obnoxious but at the same time it feels great to hold while being virtually indestructible. Not the coolest thing to tote around for insta pics of yourself with a camera... The M6 is much prettier!

You're right. The F4 is the coolest thing to tote around for selfies!

D

Pioneer 01-16-2019 14:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by pyeh (Post 2861948)
The other thing about the ZI ZM rangefinder patch is that it doesn't follow the framelines when thy correct for parallax. The patch stays centre in the viewfinder. The Bessas do this too. It slightly alters my focus-and-recompose perception.

Much as I like these Cosina-made rangefinders I think the immobile patch shows a lack of sophistication compared to M's.

Chuckle :D

Typical internet. Much ado about nothing much. It always seems to make people feel better if they can identify something that they think is a problem, even though it really isn't.

Shoot the Zeiss Ikon for awhile and you forget all about this. After a very little while I found that my rangefinder patch was always exactly where I expected to find it. It still is.

Pioneer 01-16-2019 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hughes (Post 2862108)
Hmmm,, it used to be FAST meaning Focus, Aperture, Shutter and Take but now it just seems to be Fondle...

Regards, David

Gawd. That goes back a year or two. Haven't heard that in practically forever.

jawarden 01-16-2019 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveyork (Post 2861776)
Fifteen or so years ago, when I shot rangefinders exclusively, I tested a ZI at a store. I owned an M7 and MP at the time, but something about the rangefinder patch of the ZI was disconcerting. Your eye had to be centered properly or ... I forget. But what great eye relief. Anyway, all my Leica rangefinders are gone except an M3 and dual range Summicron. More of an SLR guy now, and have been for many years.

I wonder if you were testing it outside? The only viewfinder issue I'm aware of is difficulty in seeing meter readings in very bright light.

PunkFunkDunk 01-16-2019 14:57

I do not have the longevity of decades of buy and sell experience of many RFF members, but after two relatively recent rash decisions on M body sales two years ago, I have learnt my lesson ... never sell an M! And there has definitely been an upswing in prices over the past two to three years.

I bought a great condition M2 in 2016 for AU$900 from a seller who had owned it since new. I then invested an extra AU$500 on it for a CLA, new curtains and multicoated windows. After this, it was a beauty to use and, yes, even fondle. But I then got a desire for a M6 because of the convenience of the meter and told myself I could not justify owning two Ms. So I sold the M2 at a loss of about AU$250 on the well known auction site despite providing evidence of the CLA work. Now I see user M2s go for a lot more than I sold mine which was cosmetically and mechanically excellent. Anyway, I bought a late year M6 TTL in mint condition with box and strap from a Japanese seller in 2017 for AU$2,500. This was the going rate for such a good copy on the auction site at the time. It was a lot of money for me but I felt OK with it and sold off my Mamiya C330f and some FD lenses to help. But then, I got divorced and needed the cashflow urgently to sort out my life (Leica has nothing to do with that). 18 months later and still in possession of a few M mount lenses, I desired a M6 back. Now I see that black chrome M6 TTLs in the same mint and boxed condition I used to have now appear for around AU$3,500. There is simply nothing listed or on auction at AU$2,500. I never liked the slightly bigger body of the TTL anyway so got so-called lucky and picked up a good 1993 year silver M6 classic for AU$2,220 as I also utilised a 10 per cent off promo code. From what I can see, M6 TTLs are priced so high that one might as well seriously consider saving a little more (or raising funds) and go all out on a used MP. At least that is the way the economics look from Australia (our dollar is sliding).

The moral of the story: I should never have sold the M2 and still miss it dearly. To find one as good as what I had would cost way more now than I would be comfortable investing in a non-metered camera.

jawarden 01-16-2019 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by pyeh (Post 2861948)
The other thing about the ZI ZM rangefinder patch is that it doesn't follow the framelines when thy correct for parallax. The patch stays centre in the viewfinder. The Bessas do this too. It slightly alters my focus-and-recompose perception.

Much as I like these Cosina-made rangefinders I think the immobile patch shows a lack of sophistication compared to M's.

I never would have thought of this lack of sophistication.

I just pulled out a ZI and an M3 to compare. I see the focus patch difference between the two but fail to see the lack of sophistication in the ZI. (The ZI viewfinder is bigger, brighter and without color cast, which I would argue makes it far more sophisticated than the M3, but that's just me).

pyeh 01-16-2019 16:38

I see I've touched a nerve with Pioneer and jawarden about the ZI patch. I didn't think I was making a fuss about it in the first place, but after several rolls through my ZI and my two Bessas I know what I like. They're fine cameras nonetheless.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 00:13.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.