Leica's anyone?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Stephen Berger

Stephen Berger

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I know most of us here primarily shoot nature/wildife stuff but I'm sure some (and probably many, if not most) shoot other things as well and I'm guessing quite a few do or have used Leica's.

I'm very seriously considering one. Went out early yesterday with a pal who let me borrow his M10p (with one of the types pf summilux 35mm lenses on it) to use for some street shots. It was blast and fun to hold and shoot with a rangefinder for the first time (and man what beautiful and beautifully solid hunk of metal!)

I know people can endlessly debate whether or not the Leica 'look' is a real thing and then if real, whether or not it's worth the price of admission. To me, imagined or not, there's a look. I read someone today describe it as potentially being primarily a rangefinder thing. They said, "A lot of my Leica photos have what I call an "island of focus" where the subject is isolated in the middle with equal parts foreground and background out of focus which gives the image a dreamy appearance which is what I consider the Leica "magic." Using AF, the camera only cares that the subject is in focus, but the focus plane may be foreground biased or vice-versa. Aligning the rangefinder patch on the subject means the subject is dead center in the focus plane".

I do actually have some questions so let's assume for a moment that the Leica look or magic is real, do those of you with Leica experience think it's a rangefinder thing? the M glass? If true would it be true with an SL with an M-L adapter and the M glass? What about adapting M lenses to Sony E Mount?

I ask because if I get a Leica used SL's are, relatively, quite inexpensive - there's one on FM right now for $1650 - while used M10's are certainly not (although used M240's and M9's are much less than M10's). Of course the least expensive route is just adapting an M lens or two to my Sony(s).

Anyway would love to hear any and all thoughts on the subject. TIA
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Stephen Berger said:
I know most of us here primarily shoot nature/wildife stuff but I'm sure some (and probably many, if not most) shoot other things as well and I'm guessing quite a few do or have used Leica's.

I'm very seriously considering one. Went out early yesterday with a pal who let me borrow his M10p (with one of the types pf summicron 35mm lenses on it) to use for some street shots. It was blast and fun to hold and shoot with a rangefinder for the first time (and man what beautiful and beautifully solid hunk of metal!)

I know people can endlessly debate whether or not the Leica 'look' is a real thing and then if real, whether or not it's worth the price of admission. To me, imagined or not, there's a look. I read someone today describe it as potentially being primarily a rangefinder thing. They said, "A lot of my Leica photos have what I call an "island of focus" where the subject is isolated in the middle with equal parts foreground and background out of focus which gives the image a dreamy appearance which is what I consider the Leica "magic." Using AF, the camera only cares that the subject is in focus, but the focus plane may be foreground biased or vice-versa. Aligning the rangefinder patch on the subject means the subject is dead center in the focus plane".

I do actually have some questions so let's assume for a moment that the Leica look or magic is real, do those of you with Leica experience think it's a rangefinder thing? the M glass? If true would it be true with an SL with an M-L adapter and the M glass? What about adapting M lenses to Sony E Mount?

I ask because if I get a Leica used SL's are, relatively, quite inexpensive - there's one on FM right now for $1650 - while used M10's are certainly not (although used M240's and M9's are much less than M10's). Of course the least expensive route is just adapting an M lens or two to my Sony(s).

Anyway would love to hear any and all thoughts on the subject. TIA
Click to expand...
Ended up purchasing a Leica Q2 that has a fixed 28mm f1.7 lens. Love it is an understatement. The Q2 is a wonderful and simple to use. It is a gateway drug to the Leica system and I to have been searching for a good M10P or M240 which I would pair with either 35mm and 50mm lens. Have even thought of getting a 2nd Q2 this time in monochrom. Files have been so easy to process and definetly have a very different feel than a similar focal length on the Z7 or D800. It is the camera that, I cary with me all the time if not out to shoot landscape or nature. It’s the simplisity of the cameras that get out of ones way and then the superb Leica glass.
 
Member's gallery
JohnW said:
Ended up purchasing a Leica Q2 that has a fixed 28mm f1.7 lens. Love it is an understatement. The Q2 is a wonderful and simple to use. It is a gateway drug to the Leica system and I to have been searching for a good M10P or M240 which I would pair with either 35mm and 50mm lens. Have even thought of getting a 2nd Q2 this time in monochrom. Files have been so easy to process and definetly have a very different feel than a similar focal length on the Z7 or D800. It is the camera that, I cary with me all the time if not out to shoot landscape or nature. It’s the simplisity of the cameras that get out of ones way and then the superb Leica glass.
Click to expand...
Posted several image in the forum with the Q2. Guardian of the marsh, meandering tidewater creek, guardian st Agustine.
 
Member's gallery
JohnW said:
Posted several image in the forum with the Q2. Guardian of the marsh, meandering tidewater creek, guardian st Agustine.
Click to expand...
Those are lovely pics. I've looked at many, many Q2 pics as I've been thinking about that camera for over a year. It just feels like 28mm is too wide for me to be locked into (and I know I can crop but generally don't like to on. non wildlife images). And even for the used price I could get an M10 and voigtlander Nokton 35 for close to same amount. That said I havent completely dismissed it. And the size and ease are very appealing.
 
Member's gallery
Adding a few pics from my walkabout... nothing at all groundbreaking subject or composition wise but am crazy that there's a 'look'? (and yes I know there's some vignetting, was very down and dirty in LR and didn't do anything to remove it as these ics aren't 'for' anything.
L1007250.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
L1007254.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
L1007260.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
L1007265.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
L1007266.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
L1007270.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
That second sure has that Leica look. Love the bit of glow.
My 1st lens that i bought back inthe late 60’s to supplement the 50mm on the Nikon F ftn was a 28mm vivitar that used quite a bit so the Q2 really didn’t require getting use to. I really like portrait work with the Q2 shot wide open with that f1.7. I know i’ll pick up a M10P just don’t know when.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I evaluated the Leica SL for a month or so before settling on the Sony full-frame E-mount system. The SL feels SOLID and the lenses are superb; there are a number of things that one ought to be aware of before dabbling in the system.
  • the cost of accessories is mind-boggling. Price a spare battery (and find a store that carries it) to see what I mean.
  • the options for configuring the camera are limited.
  • the SL lenses are large & heavy.
  • Optical stabilization only, no sensor stabilization unless you spring for the SL2. The optical stabilization has no options, it 'automatically' detects panning. I found that with a moving subject, it doesn't have to be moving fast, it's virtually impossible to keep the focus point on the subject. The OS lags quite a bit when you try to follow the subject, then drifts toward the subject in time for the subject to move again. Maddening.
  • the AF is contrast-detect only. Quick and silent, however.
  • Leica's service is abysmal. You're better off using independent service technicians, like Don Goldberg (highly recommended, I hope he doesn't retire soon).
The APO and ASPH lenses are to die for, and much of the magic translates to a Sony body, at least for the longer lenses. The M-cameras' sensor microlenses are engineered to work well with Leica M-mount wide-angle lenses; when the lenses are used with cameras with a thick cover glass like the Sonys the performance drops off toward the edges of the photo. Kolarivision can replace the Sony's thick cover glass with a thinner cover glass, which helps reduce the problem.

Example photos:
calann38.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Anna's Hummingbird
Sony a7rII, Leica 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R

calann40.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Anna's Hummingbird
Leica SL, Leica 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R

lepcal07.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Black-tailed Hare
Leica SL, Leica APO 90-280mm SL
​
This hare was maddeningly difficult to photograph because of the optical stabilization. The hare would hop a few inches, stop to eat for a few seconds then move along to the next tasty treat. Keeping the focus point on the hare was difficult because of the stabilizations' lag & drift.

I'm finding Sony's 100-400 and 600 GM lenses to be nearly the equal of the Leica-R 280mm f/4 APO, which is saying a lot. What I suggest: If you want to experience superb optical performance and outstanding mechanical construction and you don't mind manual focus, look at the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar E-mount lenses. They have just enough electronics to supply the camera with EXIF info, tells the camera what focal length to use with sensor stabilization and on the a1 moving the focus ring triggers the viewfinder magnification. The downside of these lenses is service (what I hear is you send 'em to Japan) and resale value.

aqufor00.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Western Columbine
Sony a7rIII, Voigtlander 65mm APO-Lathar​
 
Member's gallery
Doug Herr said:
I evaluated the Leica SL for a month or so before settling on the Sony full-frame E-mount system. The SL feels SOLID and the lenses are superb; there are a number of things that one ought to be aware of before dabbling in the system.
  • the cost of accessories is mind-boggling. Price a spare battery (and find a store that carries it) to see what I mean.
  • the options for configuring the camera are limited.
  • the SL lenses are large & heavy.
  • Optical stabilization only, no sensor stabilization unless you spring for the SL2. The optical stabilization has no options, it 'automatically' detects panning. I found that with a moving subject, it doesn't have to be moving fast, it's virtually impossible to keep the focus point on the subject. The OS lags quite a bit when you try to follow the subject, then drifts toward the subject in time for the subject to move again. Maddening.
  • the AF is contrast-detect only. Quick and silent, however.
  • Leica's service is abysmal. You're better off using independent service technicians, like Don Goldberg (highly recommended, I hope he doesn't retire soon).
The APO and ASPH lenses are to die for, and much of the magic translates to a Sony body, at least for the longer lenses. The M-cameras' sensor microlenses are engineered to work well with Leica M-mount wide-angle lenses; when the lenses are used with cameras with a thick cover glass like the Sonys the performance drops off toward the edges of the photo. Kolarivision can replace the Sony's thick cover glass with a thinner cover glass, which helps reduce the problem.

Example photos:

​
This hare was maddeningly difficult to photograph because of the optical stabilization. The hare would hop a few inches, stop to eat for a few seconds then move along to the next tasty treat. Keeping the focus point on the hare was difficult because of the stabilizations' lag & drift.

I'm finding Sony's 100-400 and 600 GM lenses to be nearly the equal of the Leica-R 280mm f/4 APO, which is saying a lot. What I suggest: If you want to experience superb optical performance and outstanding mechanical construction and you don't mind manual focus, look at the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar E-mount lenses. They have just enough electronics to supply the camera with EXIF info, tells the camera what focal length to use with sensor stabilization and on the a1 moving the focus ring triggers the viewfinder magnification. The downside of these lenses is service (what I hear is you send 'em to Japan) and resale value.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the detailed response! I would only (or at least a huge percentage of the time) use it for things like street, lifestyle, people photography so SL wise Im not super worried about the AF (especially since I'd likely use with M lenses). The things Im not sure about is if the non rangefinder Leica's with M glass still give 'the look'. And yeah thos battery/accesory prices are crazy but in looking on FM many ads for M's and SL's include extra batteries and other perks. One hesitation though is that rangefinders do go out of alignment so knowing that it might occasionally have to be gone for 6 weeks (plus the cost of such) to realign it is definitely a check in the against box.

I do have a Voigtlander 110 APO and Voigtlander Nokton 40 (with a 50 APO on the wish list). I also af a Rokinon 45 1.8. It turns out I have to be in San Francisco for work this coming week. I'll have a mile walk to and from each day and can take multiple routes so I'm going to bring my A7c and the 40 and 35mm lenses and shoot away on those walks and see how I feel about those images before taking any further steps.
 
Member's gallery
JohnW said:
That second sure has that Leica look. Love the bit of glow.
My 1st lens that i bought back inthe late 60’s to supplement the 50mm on the Nikon F ftn was a 28mm vivitar that used quite a bit so the Q2 reallt didnt require getting use to. I really like portrait work with the Q2 shot wide open with that f1.7. I know i’ll pick up a M10P just don’t know when.
Click to expand...
I'm sure I could manage with 28mm just fine, especially since my primary rig would still be my Sony setup and my primary output would still be birds/wildlife. But I could see myself being even more desirous of an M if I were happy with the Q. And the (at least semi rhetorical) question remains, is the 'the look' a feature of the rangefinder aspect of the M's (plus the M glass) or does it exist in the SL's with M glass and Q's etc.
 
Member's gallery
Stephen Berger said:
Thanks for the detailed response! I would only (or at least a huge percentage of the time) use it for things like street, lifestyle, people photography so SL wise Im not super worried about the AF (especially since I'd likely use with M lenses). The things Im not sure about is if the non rangefinder Leica's with M glass still give 'the look'. And yeah thos battery/accesory prices are crazy but in looking on FM many ads for M's and SL's include extra batteries and other perks. One hesitation though is that rangefinders do go out of alignment so knowing that it might occasionally have to be gone for 6 weeks (plus the cost of such) to realign it is definitely a check in the against box.

I do have a Voigtlander 110 APO and Voigtlander Nokton 40 (with a 50 APO on the wish list). I also af a Rokinon 45 1.8. It turns out I have to be in San Francisco for work this coming week. I'll have a mile walk to and from each day and can take multiple routes so I'm going to bring my A7c and the 40 and 35mm lenses and shoot away on those walks and see how I feel about those images before taking any further steps.
Click to expand...

There is a terrific Leica Store at 463 Bush St in downtown SF. Worth a visit even if to just view the display of B&W images on the wall.
 
Member's gallery
Doug Herr said:
Perhaps you've heard of this:

techartpro.com

Techart PRO Leica M - Sony E Autofocus Adapter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3binM22uUpg TECHART PRO adapter is the world’s first autofocus adapter for your manual focus camera lenses. It is able to turn your manual lens into an autofocus lens and use it under the Sony
techartpro.com techartpro.com
Click to expand...
Because of the issues with wider M mount lenses - which is what I'm primarily interested in - on Sony body's I haven't looked very deeply into adapters/adapting them but it does see like there are ways to mitigate it, the way you mentioned previously (Kolarivision), the Voigtlander close focus adapter, etc. But if I go that route turning the mf into af does have some appeal.
 
Member's gallery
John Woodworth said:
There is a terrific Leica Store at 463 Bush St in downtown SF. Worth a visit even if to just view the display of B&W images on the wall.
Click to expand...
I spent 45 minutes there talking to a very helpful salesman and between that and pretty much non stop research I wound up buying (on FM, not at the Leica store) a used SL2-s plus an L - M adapter and then from Ebay a Canon 1.2 LMT lens. Moody 'art' photo's here I come (lol),
 
Member's gallery
Stephen Berger said:
I know most of us here primarily shoot nature/wildife stuff but I'm sure some (and probably many, if not most) shoot other things as well and I'm guessing quite a few do or have used Leica's.

I'm very seriously considering one. Went out early yesterday with a pal who let me borrow his M10p (with one of the types pf summilux 35mm lenses on it) to use for some street shots. It was blast and fun to hold and shoot with a rangefinder for the first time (and man what beautiful and beautifully solid hunk of metal!)

I know people can endlessly debate whether or not the Leica 'look' is a real thing and then if real, whether or not it's worth the price of admission. To me, imagined or not, there's a look. I read someone today describe it as potentially being primarily a rangefinder thing. They said, "A lot of my Leica photos have what I call an "island of focus" where the subject is isolated in the middle with equal parts foreground and background out of focus which gives the image a dreamy appearance which is what I consider the Leica "magic." Using AF, the camera only cares that the subject is in focus, but the focus plane may be foreground biased or vice-versa. Aligning the rangefinder patch on the subject means the subject is dead center in the focus plane".

I do actually have some questions so let's assume for a moment that the Leica look or magic is real, do those of you with Leica experience think it's a rangefinder thing? the M glass? If true would it be true with an SL with an M-L adapter and the M glass? What about adapting M lenses to Sony E Mount?

I ask because if I get a Leica used SL's are, relatively, quite inexpensive - there's one on FM right now for $1650 - while used M10's are certainly not (although used M240's and M9's are much less than M10's). Of course the least expensive route is just adapting an M lens or two to my Sony(s).

Anyway would love to hear any and all thoughts on the subject. TIA
Click to expand...
I WISH!🙂
 
Member's gallery
Congratulations on the Leica! I hope you enjoy it. I have looked at them a few times but resisted the urge to buy one so far. I know one of these days I’ll end up with either a Leica range finder or a Fujifilm medium format. The sale price for the GFX 50R was really tempting but trying to determine what do for lenses was too much effort at the time. I would get one gf lens for landscapes but the others would be vintage lenses. If I went with Leica, I’d probably want a 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm so it would get quite expensive quickly. For now I have a poor man’s Leica, the Fujifilm X-Pro2 with the 23 and 35mm f/2 lens combo. Not quite the same thing, but a lot cheaper and serves about the same purpose for my usage. I really like the files from the X-Pro2 for street work. I also have a set of vintage Pentax and Canon lenses I use with an adapter on my Z7 which is a lot of fun.
 
Member's gallery
abc123brian said:
Congratulations on the Leica! I hope you enjoy it. I have looked at them a few times but resisted the urge to buy one so far. I know one of these days I’ll end up with either a Leica range finder or a Fujifilm medium format. The sale price for the GFX 50R was really tempting but trying to determine what do for lenses was too much effort at the time. I would get one gf lens for landscapes but the others would be vintage lenses. If I went with Leica, I’d probably want a 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm so it would get quite expensive quickly. For now I have a poor man’s Leica, the Fujifilm X-Pro2 with the 23 and 35mm f/2 lens combo. Not quite the same thing, but a lot cheaper and serves about the same purpose for my usage. I really like the files from the X-Pro2 for street work. I also have a set of vintage Pentax and Canon lenses I use with an adapter on my Z7 which is a lot of fun.
Click to expand...
Thanks. It's been fun. Between an older Summcron 50 and a couple of older LTF lenses (one canon 50 one Voigtlander 35) and one older Summicron 90 I have a nice little kit for significantly less than any current Leica M lens would cost. I also picked up an adapter to use those lenses on my Sony bodies. For me too a lot of the fun has been in using the vintage lenses and seeing the looks they create.
 
Member's gallery
Each Leica-M-Lens is able to produce that, what is known by the Leica-look, most of it by the 35mm Summilux. The secrets are (in my eyes) a special kind of reproducing the color red (LR is able to destroy it) and the bokeh, what is very blurry but always gives you an idea, whats in the background. An M with non-Leica-lenses is not realy able to do so.
 
Member's gallery
RAWky said:
Each Leica-M-Lens is able to produce that, what is known by the Leica-look, most of it by the 35mm Summilux. The secrets are (in my eyes) a special kind of reproducing the color red (LR is able to destroy it) and the bokeh, what is very blurry but always gives you an idea, whats in the background. An M with non-Leica-lenses is not realy able to do so.
Click to expand...
I do have my eye on getting a 35 Summilux eventually (almost certainly a pre FLE version) and the friend who let me use his M10, which started al of this, has offered to lend me his 50 Summilux for a couple of months as he means to sell it but isn't in a hurry to do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top