Leica limitations

[Steve_F]

Hi all,
I've had my M6TTL (first M) for 9 months now and was trying to figure out something that was 'lacking' in my Leica photography - it's getting in close. The near focus on the Leica is so much less than my FM3A (Nikkors)
My 'style' (for want of a better word) is to get in close. I can't do this with the Leica. An example is a scene outside a cafe - cup/mug/ashtray very, very prominent in the frame, and stop down to 2.8 or 4 so as to just bring the background in. Or my 7 month old daughter beginning to crawl on her stomach. Just hands and face filling the frame.
It really is quite frustrating.
So much so that I am seriously contemplating going back to full Nikon again.
Any other users out there feel the same or offer a sensible priced alternative (not a 90 Elmar Macro set-up).

Cheers,

Steve.

[dogberryjr]

It's still .7m minimum focus, but I think the 28mm Elmarit would suit your purposes.

[hendriphile]

A DR Summicron will focus to 20" and @ f/2 will give a tiny DOF... but it may or may not fit on your M6... you'd have to try a sample on your M6 to ensure compatibility.

[JPSuisse]

So what focal lengths did you generally use on your Nikons?

What focus lengths do you have for your M?

What distance do you usually shoot from?

JP

[Matus]

Hey - there are 35, 50 (older summicron) and 90 mm lenses that come with googles for rangefinder that allow quite a bit closer focusing. They can only be used on Leica cameras as they must fit perfectly on the rangefinder position/size/optics.

I hope others can share more details.

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Steve,

Any 90mm at a metre gives you about the same field of view as a 50mm at 18 inches or so. But given your style, indeed, an SLR may suit you better.

Cheers,

R.

[Mudman]

exactly what I've been doing Roger. When I need closer, I switch to a longer lens.

[ferider]

One of the two Leica 75mm lenses that focus down to 0.7m.

[k.a]

i bougth a cheep 90mm tele elemarit for "this" purpose of getting close. it focus down to about one meter which is enogth to get almost macro

[Steve M.]

Just buy a Leicaflex SL w/ a Summicron 50 and 90. They focus MUCH closer than the rangefinder lenses, and are just as good. Nikon lenses, well, they aren't Summicrons, know what I mean? And the Leicaflex will make your Nikons seem like not-so-well built cameras in comparisons. The viewfinder in the SL is like a big, bright picture window. I'm still kicking myself for selling mine, but if I go back to 35mm that's the only camera I'll need.

This was w/ an R 50 Summicron.

[Jamie Pillers]

Steve,
I'm with you. There are so many annoying things about the Leicas, at least with the bodies I can afford.

First is the cost. For an amateur photog, IMO there's no need for Leica gear. For FAR less $$, I can have a top of the line Nikon film body and mint lenses... same gear that's produced fabulous pictures for many pros for years and years.

Image quality from Leica gear is over-hyped IMO, especially for amateur photographers that aren't making huge prints. I've found that Nikkor and Voigtlander lenses give me stunning results.

The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds. No such problem with SLRs. I cannot see the widest frameline of the M2, 3, 4, or 6 (the bodies I've tried), at least not without moving my eye all over the place. By that time, the 'decisive moment' is long gone.

With my SLRs I can mount any focal length and not have to resort to add-on viewfinders or guesswork.

Close focus issue... too many work-arounds using rangefinder gear!

There's only one issue that keeps me in the rangefinder game, and that's quiet shutters. My little Nikon FG is pretty quiet, but those M, LTM, and fixed-lens rangefinder cameras are QUIET! But I've just about gotten over this issue as well.

[Dwig]

Originally Posted by Steve M.

Just buy a Leicaflex ...[/img]

Exactly. The OP's rant about "Leica" and mention of possibly "going back to full Nikon again" need to be translated into the correct terms, "rangefinder" and "going to an SLR" respectively.

The limitations the OP mentions are not Leica specific, they apply to all RF's, even the great Nikon RF's from the '50s. The advantages alluded of returning to Nikon aren't Nikon specific, but instead apply to virtually all SLRs.

[Phil_F_NM]

the ZM lenses focus down closer than 2m I believe. The 15mm CV Heliar will focus to one foot. On any M body these are scale focus distances. The Zeiss Ikon has a longer RF baselength and closer focusing than a Leica M is built in, I believe that's why the ZM lenses are like this. It's one reason that I'm looking to get an F2 and a micro-Nikkor for my next trip.

Phil Forrest

[braver]

Hey like you said, it shouldn't be so bad to shoot nikon. Lots of famous photogs do very well without any need of Leica. Wouldn't want to be in a magazine fashion shoot with a leica, 28 elmarit and a roll of trix. It's the bees knees outonthe street, but you need to pick a camera that works best where you are, not the other way around. No shame in going all Nikon, the stuff rocks, especially when you look at the price tags.

[ferider]

Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers

The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds.

Part of the problem is created by our online-selves, by promoting a wrong stereotype, namely that RFs and Teles don't go together.

An M3 with 75 or 90mm lens is about as perfect a portrait setup, as it gets, IMO. Also with eye glasses. And no, 50mm lenses don't need to get closer than 1m - if you also carry a 90mm in your bag. Etc.

Roland.

[cnphoto]

Standard pros v cons. If your cons outweigh your pros, find a better solution.

I did this and rangefinders where, for me, the best solution.

[Joop van Heijgen]

For macro and close up work I do use the Leicaflex SL with the Macro-Elmarit R 2,8/60 and the Elmarit 2,8/90...
Magnificent lenses and not too expensive to buy...
The Leicaflex have the same quality level as the M 4, M6 etc...

[Brian Sweeney]

Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5, wide-open, on the M8:



On the Nikon SP, wide-open.



Summicron 90/2, E48 version, wide-open on the M8:



Canon Serenar 85/2 on the M8, wide-open.



These go for $125 or less.

[Steve_F]

Once again stacks of helpful information. Thanks.
I hope nobody feels this was a jibe at Leica. It is simply a RF v SLR comparison as was pointed out.
I tended to use 35mm/2 and 50/1.8 on my FM3A. The flip side being that wide open off centre the quality between the two manufacturers is apparent. Stopped down slightly I have had 18x12 prints with my Nikkors.
I love the size and quietness of my M - not that the FM3A is big or noisy. I've spent to much time tabbing with stacks of kit too(ref 25lbs Canon DSLR). Taking my Mamiya RZ67 set up and a Nikon F5 up the beautiful mountains of Snowdonia North Wales.
I guess the truth is an SLR is more my style, of course I now have a tiny Leica set-up when I should have maybe bought Zeiss ZF!

Any further info etc is still appreciated.

Steve.

[kshapero]

Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers

Steve,
I'm with you. There are so many annoying things about the Leicas, at least with the bodies I can afford.

First is the cost. For an amateur photog, IMO there's no need for Leica gear. For FAR less $$, I can have a top of the line Nikon film body and mint lenses... same gear that's produced fabulous pictures for many pros for years and years.

Image quality from Leica gear is over-hyped IMO, especially for amateur photographers that aren't making huge prints. I've found that Nikkor and Voigtlander lenses give me stunning results.

The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds. No such problem with SLRs. I cannot see the widest frameline of the M2, 3, 4, or 6 (the bodies I've tried), at least not without moving my eye all over the place. By that time, the 'decisive moment' is long gone.

With my SLRs I can mount any focal length and not have to resort to add-on viewfinders or guesswork.

Close focus issue... too many work-arounds using rangefinder gear!

There's only one issue that keeps me in the rangefinder game, and that's quiet shutters. My little Nikon FG is pretty quiet, but those M, LTM, and fixed-lens rangefinder cameras are QUIET! But I've just about gotten over this issue as well.

Jamie, you're pushing it, bud. Don't do it Jamie. Don't burst the Leica balloon, don't please.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by ferider

Part of the problem is created by our online-selves, by promoting a wrong stereotype, namely that RFs and Teles don't go together.

Well, that's in fact one of those stereotypes which I find absolutely justified. I've been using 85, 90 and 135 lenses on a Leica with a 0.72x viewfinder for a while. I simply hated it. For some time I tried to force myself to like it, and eventually I gave up because it's such a squinty affair, with wildly inaccurate framing. I guess it's an acquired taste, like Marmite, fermented mare's milk or Visoflexes.

Eventually I went back to the SLR for everything longer than 50. Through-the-lens viewing hath its advantages and teles are one of them. A large image, faster portrait lenses, close focusing, and visually being able to put focus exactly where I want it made all the difference.

[Brian Sweeney]

You will always find users that live inside a "Brand Bubble" and cannot evaluate the gear in an unbiased manner.

It is best to know the limitations of the equipment that you are using, and have an alternative when the situation calls for it.

Now- for the situation that the OP refers to, the use of a short telephoto extends the capability of the Leica into that domain. I found that using a 50mm lens on an SLR close-up to get baby photo's was a limitation. Basically, "too close for comfort" and the "Daddy factor". Putting a little distance between yourself and the subject, especially a toddler, was the real solution.

As far as using Telephoto lenses on a rangefinder camera, I and others just do not have a problem with it. I can focus and frame the Nikkor 8.5cm f2 wide-open and close-up faster than i can using the Nikkor 85/2 on the F2a.

[Ronald M]

In principle, the RF camera focuses very well but frames poorly. The slr frames better, perfect if you have a pro nikon body, but focuses poorly. Take your choice, but you don`t get both.

If you elect to use a RF, there are close up accesories for older 50 mm lenses, and lenses like the DR to get you in closer. I have no idea of comparability with M8. And there is always the visoflex which is simply marvelous. Good copies of compatable viso lenses may be hard to find.

[david.elliott]

I hate not being able to see the full framelines of my m3 or bessa r. :\

[icebear]

To get a close up shot of a coffee mug, a flower, a leaf or baby shot no. #1248 for that matter, you can always get 150 GBP P'n Shoot with "flower setting". Panasonics even have Leica glass if need be . Sorry couldn't help it ...