Moment of madness? Leica to film SLR

Funnily enough, I'm in the process of transitioning from Pentax film SLRs to Contax partly because of the problem finding K-mount lenses in the focal length I wanted at prices I could afford. Also, in part, because I just had a fancy for trying something a bit more modern [to be used alongside an M3 and a Rolleiflex], and the late model Contax bodies are more to my taste than the MZ and PZ series Pentax bodies.

That said, I did also give some serious thought to FD-mount Canon bodies and lenses, and Nikon partly because of the wide-spread availability of cheap high-quality lenses for both.
 
I have a friend in LA who just went thru this process. He went from a M6 to (2) Nikon FM's. Specs are almost the same. He loves the handling and the ruggedness of the bodies (as I do, also). They are readily fixable but hardly ever and the availability of Nikon Manual focus lenses is very great.
For myself when it comes to Manual focus SLR's, I find the Nikon FM/FE's of higher quality than the Olympus SLR's (I can hear the protests now). Having said that I would be just as happy if I were an OM guy, but I am too far down the Nikon hole now.
 
I've been around this cycle several times. Leica gear is so good, and so expensive, it's always hard to say "I don't use it enough, I should sell it and move to something different I want to use more." But it happens. Warning: keep your favorite lens and sell everything else. You'll likely want another Leica M at some point... That lens will come in handy. :)

If you really want to replace your Leica kit with a mechanical film SLR, I can't think of anything more durable, easy to get repaired, easy to find lenses for than a Nikon. Most of what I used for almost half of my 45+ years doing photography was an FM. Tough, simple, not too big, etc. The last series FM2n is even better but can't take pre-AI lenses without modification to some of the lenses' aperture ring (the FM's meter coupling ring had a flip-away tab, the FM2n's do not). The 20mm f/3.5 AI-S, the 28/2 AI, the 35/2 AI-S, the pre-AI 85/1.8, and the 105/2.5 AI-S are lenses to have. Others too, but that's enough.

I had Olympus OM-1, OM-2, and Minolta XD11, and Contax S2, 169ma as well. Always went back to Nikon.

Nowadays ... yeah, I have Ms again. I also reacquired a Nikon F and a few lenses. I haven't used the F very much yet, it's a lovely old thing though.


..."Equipment is transient. Photographs endure."...
 
I wandered from Nikon -> Leica -> Konica M -> Contax SLR
The Contax cameras are wonderful, and a body like the classic 139Q is pretty small, with a good viewfinder, good ergonomics, etc.

combine it with the pancake 45/2.8 and it is smaller than M7 & Co.
 
The OM-1 comes in 3 versions with minor variations throughout production runs.
There is the early OM-1, without a motor drive coupling. Originally it could be added later but now that would probably not be worth the cost even if it could be done.

Then came the OM-1md, from the factory with motor drive coupling.

Then the OM-1n was introduced with various changes.

The real expert on these models is John Hermanson, owner of Camtech and repair and maintenance guru of all things OM.
 
Murchu said:
If you do go the Nikon route, just beware the 35's may not be in the same league as you are used to, although the 24's & 28's are supposed to be stellar. 50 & 90, you should have no problem finding very capable lenses in this range.
Click to expand...

Can you be more specific about the 35's and their issues? I shoot with the Nikon FM and the 35 f1.4 AIS. I think it's a really great setup and find few faults with this lens.

Also - I am unsure about the FM2n but I bought my FM and 50 f2 lens for 100$ and it serves me incredibly well. I love the build quality. Its a tank. Agree with what others have said about the shutter sound, it's not discreet that's for sure.

The Nikon AIS lenses are excellent though, there are many to choose from and plenty of very fast ones if you need an upgrade.

Go for it! Next on my list is an F3 or F2 and use the waist level viewfinder for street shooting from the hip!
 
Contax.....always wanted to try one out and use those sweet Zeiss lenses......quick turn off computer, commence cold shower........
 
doolittle said:
FM2n is quite a small camera. Without a lens not that much different than an M6. Lighter though. They are well built and seem to last well. Work fine if the battery for the exposure meter dies too. Only thing I don't like about mine is the noise of the shutter, it makes a fair thump. However it does do 1/4000.
Click to expand...
+1 for the FM2n. Smaller and lighter than the M6. Perhaps the 35mm f2, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8? All great glass from the '60s and '70s. Another choice might be 24mm 2.8, 50/1.4 and 105mm 2.5. That 105 id a Nikon legend!
 
menthel said:
If I were to ditch the Leica gear (its just too much money tied up in gear that gets used not often enough- M6, 35mm summi v3, 50mm voigtlander f1.5 and 90mm emarit f2.8), what would be a good replacement system?

I am thinking small, manual SLR. I previously owned an OM2-SP which I loved but would like something more along the lines of my M6; ie manual and not reliant on batteries- fine to have for metering but not for anything else. I have therefore been thinking about a Nikon FM2N. Seems to suit the billing but how small are they? Would also want a 3 lens set up again, 28-35 (f2 or 2.8), 50mm (f1.8 or faster) and a portrait lens ~90 (f2.8 or faster).

Ideas, suggestions or is this just madness? If the leica gear went obviously I would have quite a lot to use but say ~£600 in total for this leaving me a nice chunk of money freed up for other reasons.
Click to expand...


Menthel, please be reminded that this is largely a matter of personal taste and what "clicks" for you. There is without a doubt excellent advice in this thread from others on mechanical film SLR systems "worthy" of replacing your Leica M gear.

But I would just like to relate my experience from about 2 years agao:

I felt that I had too much money tied up in Leica M gear (prices were also constantly rising, so there was incentive to "cash in", plus I actually felt that some of my lenses (e.g., 50mm Summilux ASPH) actually exceeded optically what 35mm film can deliver, so why not just use lesser lenses?

So after reading some threads here on RFF and looking at lots of photos on Flickr, I bought an Olympus Om-1 and a few great prime lenses. Luckily I kept my Leica M gear for the time being.

Well, to cut a long story short, I didn't "click" with the OM-1 at all. I found it more difficult to focus than my Leica, especially under low-light conditions, and I missed the RF vewifinder experience where you see everything in focus, not just the plane that is ACTUALLY in focus (I hope this makes sense). The only area where the SLR worked better for me than my Leica M was when using lenses of 90mm or longer (I got a sweet 180mm lens), and the occasional shot I wanted to take closer than 0,7 meters.

So I ended up selling all the Olympus OM gear. I now have only a Yashica FR with two excellent Tamron Adaptall lenses (105mm and 180mm) which I use in preference over my Leica M gear for some portraiture and theatre/sports events.

Otherwise, it's still RANGEFINDERS for me all the way.

So my advice is to try the SLR out before you sell the Leica M gear if possible. Perhaps an OM-1 with a 50/1.8 - they are quite inexpensive, and the 50/1.8 is a lovely sharp lens.
 
I would suggest to go with OM as well, I have OM1's, 3 and 4Ti's. The focus rotation is the same as the M lenses, nice large bright clear viewfinder.
The simplicity of the OM1 is great, yet the meter of the 3/4 is well worth the extra complexity..
Some never get on with the speed on the lens flange, it seemed normal to me.
I'm quite lucky having a ton of the lenses from back in the day, but they are still reasonably plentiful in the 2nd hand market, although can still hold a premium for the sort after ones.
Pentax M42 is also good, not so many choices of lenses, but the 50/1.4 is a legend. Can bang nails in with the bodies
Nikon is Nikon... plenty of good stuff, some not so good.
 
Again, thanks all. I am really on a "fact finding mission" at present before jumping in. Buying whilst holding on to the leica gear is possible and perhaps preferable, as suggested above.
 
I'm thinking about getting an OM-1 for my daughter's first film camera. But what do you do about the obsolete battery for the meter?
 
Well there is what I have known, and there is what I have dreamed.
Know: Pentax LX, Nikon FM2
Always wanted to try: Olympus, Contax
Leica R stuff is also cheaper now than it ever has been. But if you want to save money, I think replacing with Pentax/Nikon/Olympus are better choices as they are fine platforms with good lenses. BTW, Pentax cameras take all M42 screw-mount lenses in stop-down mode with an adapter. Some of these are available for VERY low prices.

Another generic way to approach the issue: what lenses have you always wanted to use? Get 'em, and then figure out a body that you can bolt 'em to.

Ben Marks
 
goamules said:
I'm thinking about getting an OM-1 for my daughter's first film camera. But what do you do about the obsolete battery for the meter?
Click to expand...


OM-1 battery issue has been well discussed.

1) use a zinc-oxide hearing aid battery. Cheap and plentiful but short life.
2) get a 1.55v to 1.35v adapter. (I think they're called MR9 or CRIS?) about $30 us
3) have the camera modified with a schottky diode. Diodes cost pennies but dexterity and soldering skills are required. You can certainly have a professional make the conversion.

4) go meterless. Sunny-16 is fun and easy.
 
I have one of those MR9 type adapters which I use in my Leicameter MR-4, and have previously used in camera bodies. They work very well.

I gave the Leica R system a try a year or two back, but ended up switching back to Pentax as I didn't find the ergonomics of the R4 (which is what I had) suited me, and it didn't balance well with the Summicron. However, that was just my own personal taste in handling. The images were excellent.
 
wblynch said:
OM-1 battery issue has been well discussed.

1) use a zinc-oxide hearing aid battery. Cheap and plentiful but short life.
2) get a 1.55v to 1.35v adapter. (I think they're called MR9 or CRIS?) about $30 us
3) have the camera modified with a schottky diode. Diodes cost pennies but dexterity and soldering skills are required. You can certainly have a professional make the conversion.

4) go meterless. Sunny-16 is fun and easy.
Click to expand...

That sounds like too much aggrivation for the Olympus OM system. I just picked up a Pentax SPII & I had a hard enough time looking for a battery. I'm glad Canon FD SLR's went with the 6v. that can still be purchased anywhere.

Why not just go with an M3 and be done with it. You can't shoot any slr in as low light as you can a rangefinder like an M3.
 
Thanks, that's what I was afraid of, you have to do a battery conversion. While I'm fine carrying an external meter, I don't think my daughter would appreciate the camera without a working meter. She's in college, and a very experienced m4/3 shooter. She'd be wanting to shoot in her dorm room, in lower light, etc, and would be disappointed at "guessing" exposures and having a lot of failures. Maybe I'll look for one with a converted battery adapter, or just skip it. What a shame the 100s of thousands of wonderful cameras and meters from the 70s-80s are all now obsolete, not because of scarce film but because of the great mercury battery scare.
 
The MR9 battery adapter is pretty easy to get hold of, and you just buy standard silver-type cells to load into that.

The difference between an M3 and lens, and an OM1 and lens, in the UK, is about the equivalent of $600 or $700 US (or considerably more depending on the lens). Not that I'm knocking the M3, I have one. But they aren't equivalent cameras in terms of expense, and the M3 doesn't have a meter.
 
I did this exact same thing, in a bit more roundabout way...M6 to Nikon FE2.

I added a fantastic Nikkor 28/2.8 and 50/1.4, and spent $400 in total.

A friend of mine and I were discussing this. He bought the same kit and capabilities in a Leica. He got an M7 (aperture-priority shooting) with 28 and 50. He spent a LOT more. Pros for Nikon...1/4000 shutter. Pros for M7...quieter shutter.

That's petty much it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top