....into getting an M and a 35/50 lens? I am an artist and high school art teacher and though I do mostly painting/drawing/printmaking I like photography and have even taught it at the junior and senior high level.I have shot an FM2 forever and always with a 50/1.8.I like to shoot people, and am a figuritive artist by nature.The Nikon is good but I am also a perfectionist and I am having a big itch to try the the 'Leica' lenses.I would also like to move into photography more.I am also the kind of guy that like things the way they 'used to be made .I like wood and metal- not 'plastic'.When I fly fish I do it with a rod made frome split cane not graphite.When I last went to a photo shop and picked up an F-100 I honestly had no clue what to do with and it's buttons. So...is the M going to do it for me?

-- robert lederer (robertle@netcom.ca), March 13, 2002

Answers

We get these questions all the time so don't be offended if some moron insults you for posting this. This forum is also for guys like you contemplating the "leap".

Firstly a couple of drawbacks from moving to an M, in terms of usage of the equipment. 1. You must focus in the centre, then recompose. 2. Viewfinder flare can make it almost impossible to focus at times, especially with lenses larger than 50mm. 3. No macro is possible with a standard M setup. 4. The viewfinder doesn't show depth of field, although this can be good in a lot of situations because you can see around the picture/subject clearly, especially with telephoto lenses.

There are probably more, but these were the concerns and difficulties I sometimes deal with after 4 months of owning the M.

So is the M going to do it for you? Only one way to find out, and it comes at an expense if trialling isn't possible. Good luck

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 13, 2002.

I was in the same boat 3 months ago with Nikon and heard the siren call as well. Take the plunge and don't worry about any of the buyer's remorse, etc. It really is a remarkable system and more thought provoking way to make pictures. You'll love it. I own the last pre-Aspherical 35mm summicron and a type 1 rigid 50mm summicron. One warning - its an obsession. I find myself trawling eBay all the time for that next lens, etc. And you have the added benefit (or curse?) of being able to consider the M7 now.

-- Jay Bee (JBee193@aol.com), March 13, 2002.

Hi Robert,

Welcome to this forum. Don't worry too much about the warning in the first response: it's not necessarily true that morons will insult you. I, for one, have no intention of doing so.

From what you say about your tastes, I think you'll like the M. It has its quirks, of course, like the way the film is loaded. Also, if you need a built-in meter, then the M5, the M6 "classic", M6 TTL or the new M7 are your only choices. When it comes to lenses, the 50mm Summicron (f/2) or Summilux (f/1.4) might be better than a 35mm lens for people and will give the same view and perspective you're used to seeing with your Nikon except, possibly, for minimum focus distance. A .72 viewfinder magnification is the one I'd suggest, because its frameline for the 50mm is closest to ideal, IMHO.

Good luck!

-- Ray Moth (ray_moth@yahoo.com), March 13, 2002.

I took the leap a month or so ago, and I love using the M6 TTL, 35 summilux and 75 summilux. I came from a Canon 1N and 28-70L zoom. The quietness and compactness of the Leica, and the quality of the instrument and images is awesome. So, I think it will appeal to you on both fronts- using it and the results. A bit like appreciating sculpture, the Leica is intoxicating. But, of course, the real appreciation are the results. And apart from the focusing (which probably is the most time-consuming), it's very simple to use and accurate. Focusing will get faster of course.

Just do it! ; )

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 13, 2002.

Rent an M6 before you plunk down a bunch of money. For most purposes, a SLR is better than a RF camera. Consider a Nikon F3, since you already have Nikkor lenses..

-- Wilhelm (wmitch3400@hotmail.com), March 14, 2002.

robert:

I Jumped and I love it.

In any field of technology(or art I guesss) simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

All the above applies, but keep in mind that most of the time one can sell Leica stuff for almost what you bought it for, as long as you don't spoil the cosmetics.

Like any other art or craft, it take time, patience and dedication. You will not likely produce masterpieces overnight or in a few weeks, but after a year, you may well say that the overall "Quality" of your prints or slides is "better".

I have an FM3a and an M6 and each has it's own place, strengths and weaknesses, so it is usually not one in place of the other, but an expansion of your art/craft to include different styles.

Cheers

-- richard ilomaki (richard.ilomaki@hotmail.com), March 14, 2002.

About 20 years ago I was in a similar spot. I still have my FM2. Leica Ms are peerless for people, travel subjects. Eliot Erwitt in the intro to Personal Exposures had the least pedantic explanation for why that is. In addition, it seems that you will enjoy being an anachronism.

-- Sal Ortega (sal_ortega@hotmail.com), March 14, 2002.

Robert If Izaak Walton and Charles Cotton were alive today I am sure they would use a digital camera to record their catch. But the flying fishing analogy may not be far from the mark. The M makes you think, is fast, stealthy, quiet, mechanical (no bleeping and whirring), ergonomic, and light. Not to mention the sublime lenses. And like all of the best tackle, it is reliable.

-- Steve Barnett (barnet@globalnet.co.uk), March 14, 2002.

Come on in, the water's fine. You wont know what it is like till you try. If you dont like using Leicas, you can always sell the gear and get your money back. I jumped in and now I'm hooked.

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

This is like those scenes where the crowd at the foot of the building is shouting up to the suicidal man on the balcony - Juuuump! Juuuuump!

It sounds to me as if you're already convinced.

Juuuuump!

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), March 14, 2002.

If you are using a good manual SLR like the FM2 and a fixed lens the jump shouldn't be to far - you will just have to get used to a new viewfinfder and focusing method. I would say the jump to an AF all dancing/singing camera like the F100 (again good for what it is designed to do) would be bigger! Go with the 50mm lens - I don't like the 35mm perspective as its neither wide enough to look dynamic nor narrow enough to be selective - you will love the quality of a good 50 F2 summicron -good though the Nikon 1.8 is - there is something else about the leica lens that sets it one step further up the image quality ladder. Looking at the world through a brightline finder with plenty of space around t eframe is a totaly liberating experience - you see things in a different way. Also being able to capture expressions on faces will be a hug leap forwards - you see what you have got whereas on th eSLR you actualy miss it until you see the picture - this may sound odd but once you learn to anticipate and interact with a person or scene you will understand. On the engineering side - as you clearly appreciate this - you will have in your hands a product of man's finest endevours to produce a 'perfect machine' - from original conception and design and through years of evolution it's simply 'right'! Go - on do it! BTW - going about creating something with an M +50 is like taking out a sketch book and charcoal - you might not have all the colours and textures you can get with oils and canvas but within the limitations you can produce great work - I have often though that the more limited the range of an instrument/mediums expression enables you to concentrate on the subject matter and the proces of creating - free from the extra choices of colours, brushes, lenses, filters etc

-- John Griffin (john.griffin@millerhare.com), March 14, 2002.

The M -- any M -- is going to do it for you! Because it has so few buttons. It still jumps me. But I love it. And I'm still the boss. With my old Nikons (and Nikonos IIIs) it used to be the other way around, and that has gotten worse and worse and worse...

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), March 14, 2002.

I went through a variety of SLRs (Exakta, Nikon, Canon FD, Alpa, and Fuji) before settling on the M rangefinder.

Rangefinders can't focus as close as SLRs, or handle telephotos very well, or let you see esactly what will be on the film plane prior to exposure.

They are quieter, have better lenses (especially at 50mm and shorter), focus accurately in very dim light, are much more compact, let you see beyond a given lense's frame lines, and are very fast, as the time lag between shutter release and exposure is 1/50th of a second, as compared to 1/20 for a fast SLR, and about 1/2 for autofocus.

Once you're learned the camera (It's not for beginners, but you're not a beginner), you'll never want to go back. My Canon F1s gather dust, waiting for jobs that require macro or telephoto capabilities, and my Leicas are in daily use.

-- Tom Bryant (boffin@gis.net), March 14, 2002.

I was a Nikon FM user for a long time (16 years) before getting an M6. I used a friend's M6 a few weeks and a year later got my own. I was not happy with the M6 for about 6 months to a year-it seemed much heavier than the FM and harder to grip in my smallish hands. It was easy to adapt to otherwise-the principal controls are all in similar places, though some turn in directions opposite to those you are used to on a Nikon.

Now, the camera has totally supplanted the FM for all people photography. I started really appreciating it when I started paying closer attention to the timing of my shots.

A great camera to use. Don't hesitate. If you have the dollars lined up, jump.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), March 14, 2002.

Hi, Robert:

I couldn't help but feel tunned to your self description concerning "things the way they used to be". The picture became all clear when you said you fly fish.

I have no doubt: classic Ms are for you. No doubt they are not easy to master at first attempt. But I have no doubt either that it will be an important part of the appeal you will feel for them.

Next item: which M? My suggestion for starters: M3, double stroke; Summicron 50mm, f2; hand held, no-batteries light meter; B&W film (Ilford XP2 if you don't do your own dark room work)or slides.

Yes, you gessed right: that is the main part of my own treasured tools.

By the way: I have no plans to part from my FM2n. I wouldn't advise you to sell yours either. It isn't being manufactured any longer and is a fine camera in its kind.

Good luck and welcome, Robert.

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), March 14, 2002.

Robert, Welcome to the forum. I am another moron who will not insult you. I used an F2AS for years. I have a dozen lenses for it, but almost used the (wonderful) 50mm f/2 exclusively, occasionally using a Series E 100mm.

I "jumped" to Leica after much research, including in this forum. I decided on a M6 Classic, Sumicrons 35 and 50, and Elmarit-M 90. I still use the 50 almost exclusively with occasional use of the 90. One day I guess I will learn to appreciate a wide angle lens.

The reasons for my Jump - SLR finder blackout and slower speeds hand- holdable without mirror slap. I don't like tripods, I don't use a flash unless I really, really have to, I like 35mm photography. Large or Medium format is not for me. There are other reasons, but these are the main ones.

I don't find film loading on an M6 tricky at all. I don't find focusing any trickier either. I was used to a 45 degree, split-prism focusing on the F2AS. Almost the same with the Leica. If you are used to screen focusing, it may be an adjustment.

But as a moron, paraphrasing the campaign manager of one of our greatest presidents ever, I can say that when it all comes down to it, "It's the lenses, stupid." Go ahead and jump.

-- Hil (hegomez@agere.com), March 14, 2002.

Why do you want to get a leica ? The camera you have is great and it would certainly be cheaper to just buy a 35mm lens for it . If you really want a change , try a 4 x 5 graflex camera . It'll slow you down , be really cheap and will give a tremendous increase in photographic quality ( and with the money left over , you can buy a good film scanner and some books ).

-- leonid (kotlyarl@mail.nih.gov), March 14, 2002.

Robert-

Just jump man! If you're using the FM2 and a 50 now, then an M6 and 50 Summicron will be pretty easy to grasp. I think people make a big deal about the "transition". You're already a photographer, so any adjustments you have to make should be fairly simple.

I shot with an slr and a 50 for about 20 years before I bought an M6 and 50 Summicron. I didn't rent first, I just handled the camera in the shop and plunked down the bucks and never looked back. Based on your posting, it sounds like you will appreciate the basic nature of shooting with a rangefinder.

Just jump.

Don't worry about having to "focus and recompose". I think we do some of that with slr's also. Rangefinder patch flare is almost not worth talking about. In the past 3 years I've seen flare maybe 3 or 4 times. The good thing about using a rangefinder camera it that it will make you think about photography. You'll have to think about depth of field instead of seeing it on a gound glass. You will also learn to appreciate things like zone focusing, hyperfocal distance and estimating distances without using the rangefinder at all.

If you do some practice and give it some time, I really believe that using a rangefinder will make you a more well-rounder shooter.

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

If your intention is to shoot with a 50 mm lens only it might be a good thing to look at a "cosmetically challenged" M3 single stroke. This camera has the best rangefinder mechanism of all the Ms and if there's a piece of vulcanite or two thats missing it will drop the price down to quite affordable. Couple it to a previous generation 50 mm Summicron (or a DR Summicron if you can find one) and you have quite the formidable shooting outfit. The best part is... someone has already taken the depreciation for you (for the cosmetic appearance of the camera) so should you decide that it isn't your cup of tea you can probably re-coup most if not all of your capital outlay. In terms of precision though... you'll like the M3 (or any M for that matter, save maybe the M5).

-- John (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

Tough question, and one that's hard to answer.

The above posters are right -- shooting with a rangefinder like an M is a very different experience to shooting with an SLR. It's easier to get good compositions, because you see all the possibilities when looking through the viewfinder -- you'll find that you recompose without thinking about it. The camera is small and portable -- I'll be out at a concert this evening with a camera around my neck and a small fanny pack, and I'll have 15mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm focal lengths to choose from. Much nicer than the time I was stupid enough to trek around Europe with 51 lbs of camera gear...

The M cameras are unbeatable at what they do well: low-light handheld work, travel photography where you can carry a lot without straining, and people photography where you're not trying to draw attention to yourself. They really suck if you're into wildlife photos (long lenses), macro work, or anything where what you see in the viewfinder has to match *exactly* what you're getting on the film (there'll always be some degree of parallax).

All Leicas have excellent glass, and all instill a peculiar form of pride of ownership. If you're not sure whether or not you want a rangefinder but you're still tempted by Leica glass, then you ought to be able to get into an older Leica SLR with a 50/35 Summicron (summicron = f2 max aperture; Elmarit = f2.8 max aperture; Summilux = f1.4 max aperture) for not too much money, and used gear tends to hold its value.

Personally, I've given up on SLR's. I've owned some nice ones (F5, F3HP, F1n, F1N, T90, 500C, ETR), but to me they just don't work the way I want to work. I'll stick to the rangefinders and TLR's from now on.

And after all that, the previous poster is right about an M3 as a good starting point. I bought a DS M3 last week that came in yesterday -- it's a user, but the glass is excellent and everything seems to work perfectly. There's a good chance you can talk me into selling it for what I paid for it ($520) -- the viewfinder is *great* but having one two-stroke camera body *and* a hexar rf *and* an M6 is a little much -- I'll try to just have 2 M6's next week, with the same manual of arms.

-- Derek Zeanah (derek@zeanah.com), March 14, 2002.

there are two seperate questions, the first is should you get into a rangefinder. rangefinders are not for everyone, and some people such as myself prefer to to portrait work with slr's. this is a personal question, and it depends on many factors such as your style of shooting, how tight you frame your subjects, and your ability to visulize out of focus areas. many slr's have a depth of field view which helps.

the advantage of a rangefinder is that it is light and compact, and it can be thrown in a coat pocket, something an slr can not do. the leica m3 is made for a 50mm, if you were going with a 35, you would need to go with another m.

-- greg mason (gmason1661@aol.com), March 14, 2002.

Do it. I did it last fall. I came from years with an FM2 and don't miss a thing. If you think the FM2 is a great camera, you'll go gaga over an M6TTL. It does have a learning curve, but after a few rolls, you'll be getting results you never dreamed of. Do it. Do it now.

-- Ken Geter (kgeter@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

Robert: I did it also (many years ago) and never regretted it for a second. But it doesn´t only take a few rolls of film! Do not give up before you reach about 50. When your photography has not improved then, get rid of the camera again. You won´t have a great loss in $$ I would think.

Good luck in your decision

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), March 15, 2002.

Hi Robert, I too am an artist, I switched from an F3 to an M6TTL two years ago, and just recently bought an M3. I work mostly in watercolours, landscape and cityscape and sometimes insert people into my paintings. I love the Leica as tool, I can use it intinctively. I prefocus, I make all my shutter speed and f stop settings before I head out so that when I hit the streets or the fields, and I see a scene that is inspiring I can just concentrate on the composition, the shutter is instant. I use the M6 with a 35mm f2 pre asph lens and colour slide film, and the M3ss with a 50mm f2 and B&W film. The results are always great and the feel of the camera will remind you of the feel of really great fishing rod. My Nikon sits on the shelf now, I haven't used it in 6 months. all the best, Alan

-- Alan Stein (acstein@e-velocity.net), March 15, 2002.