If video killed the radio star, post-processing software killed the Leica. The colour and contrast with Leica cameras were always superior. Nowadays, I can get the same results as a Leica with any half decent lens and body. If money was no object, I would have a collecton of them. I just can't justify the prices when there are other alternatives. Great video. Leicas are cool.
As a Leica owner I would say they are the perfect tool for street/documentary photography. If you don't need the speed or stealth then there is no reason choose it over an SLR IMO.
I get it, Leicas are very appealing. They're gorgeous, marvelous engineering, and they're the tool of choice for many of the greatest photographers of all time. Who can argue with that? But Leica is also a club, like Ferrari or Rolex. It's social status, exclusivity, belonging to an elite... and i really don't give a sh*t about those things (because i'm poor, of course). But really, i want a camera that i'm not scared to use, to walk with, and there is a plethora, decades worth of cheap alternatives that will give you quality, reliability, ease of use... I don't need or even want a Leica. If i had one, i would probably sell it (after a few rolls...)
Wow, got my M3 for $850 from the Leica store nyc. They go for 2G’s now…. Hmm I also have an M9 from the same store in 2015. Not rich that’s for sure and I feel RUclips has shot up the used prices in the last few years to ridiculous levels. I really do enjoy shooting with these cameras a lot. But I do also like SLR’s and all varieties of medium format. I do get what you’re saying on focusing with an SLR vs a rangefinder. They really are very different experiences I feel. SLR is more engaging I think.
You make interesting points, the cost alone is a deterrent for most, especially when the end result will be the same. If it's a size issue then a Canonet/Canon P will fit the bill. If you want a tiny SLR that works excellent, has a meter and is the same size as a canonet I highly recommend the Olympus OM2.
I understand your point. I had a M3, years ago, and didn't click with the rangefinder style of shooting. I was also constantly worried about scratching the lenses, which would have resulted in a substantial loss in value. I happily went back to my Japanese SLR's.
im thrifty because i'm a suckingly poor brazilian, i have a trip 35 that i bought for 80 reais (that would be 16 usd) that's my only film cam for now, but my dad has a zenit dslr with a lot of lens mold, thinking about buying an M42 adapter for my cheap sony A3000 and some m42 lenses in the future to use on the zenit too, my grandfather also had a yashica mat 124g that i actually used and loved it, a minolta srt102 with cranky shutter and mirror and another rangefinder olympus in a similar situation, i'd love to learn camera repair to fix those myself
Sometimes one can dismiss a camera or lens and when you get your photos back the results change the way you feel about that. Wonder if you used it with fresh film and were photographing what you love something might make more sense when you see the results
I love the rangefinders in general but I prefer the SLR. I have a couple of rangefinders all from the 50's and 60's my favorite is the Voightlander Vito CL. Not a spectacular camera. Heavy for its size and the image quality is good but not outstanding. However, it has the absolute best shutter sound. It "snicks" the shutter is like kitten purr, so damn cute. One cannot smile and say "aww" when that button is clicked.
I kinda want one and can afford one just fine, but I’m also perfectly happy using a beat up OM-1 and a rebel ti 🤷♂️ I’ll probably get one eventually though.
I have had the opposite experiences, while many cameras have broken on me, my old M models never have, so what experiences have you made that lead you to that conclusion?
@@justaboringjoha3678 Leica's come in for repair roughly triple the rate of other cameras. Since the late 80's they are a low reliability camera compared to anything Japanese made. I would be interested in hearing this long list of other cameras you've had break on you. I'm not saying that you're lying, but you're definitely intentionally misrepresenting Leica. Let me guess, your Leica's just happen to sit on the shelf while you actually used your "many" other cameras?
@@evrythingis1 Why so passive aggressive? And why saying I'm intentionally representing something with malus intent? I agree that the Leicas from like the 80s aren't it, I own an M2 and M3 wich are older than the m4-2s and M6s I had brake on me: Minolta SRT 303 Minolta XE-1 Minolta XD-7 Minolta XD-5 Nikon FM Olympus mju zoom Canon AE-1 program Canon EOS 100 2x Edixa mat Reflex Exakta Varex 2b Iloca IIc I just think you misrepresent Leica by saying that they are not at all reliable, yes the Leitz Canada stuff isn't good and you can also forget about most of the R-series as well as all of the M5/M6 production, but older M models and Barnack type cameras I think are reliable. I understand that as a service tech, always getting M6s that haven't been cla'd ever is annoying, as I can agree they really cheated out on them.
@@evrythingis1 Dude, are you not able to hold a normal conversation? My M3 & M2 work perfectly fine and yes, Leica post M4 and Leicaflex SL2 sucks, but I think it's really just because people use them a lot without the cameras ever being serviced. Also here the cameras from the top of my head that broke on me: Minolta SRT 303 Minolta XE-1 Minolta XD-7 Minolta XD-5 Canon AE-1 Canon EOS 100 Olympus stylus epic zoom Edixa Reflex Edixa mat Reflex mod.B Exakta Varex 2b Nikon FM Illoca 2c
@@justaboringjoha3678 Oh, so the Leica's issues are from being used a lot but not serviced, but the less expensive cameras that were actually commonly used a lot but not serviced had issues stemming from their name brand huh? Leica's are by far the least physically abused cameras on the market and their owners also get the most preventative maintenance done... You know in normal conversation you aren't supposed to personally identify with a brand like a walking advertisement right? It is not the 1960's anymore and you are misrepresenting reality.
Always happy to help bro!
If video killed the radio star, post-processing software killed the Leica.
The colour and contrast with Leica cameras were always superior. Nowadays, I can get the same results as a Leica with any half decent lens and body.
If money was no object, I would have a collecton of them. I just can't justify the prices when there are other alternatives.
Great video. Leicas are cool.
As a Leica owner I would say they are the perfect tool for street/documentary photography. If you don't need the speed or stealth then there is no reason choose it over an SLR IMO.
Speed and stealth? You know it's not the 1960's anymore right?
Cool to hear you're a fellow fan of the F3.
I get it, Leicas are very appealing. They're gorgeous, marvelous engineering, and they're the tool of choice for many of the greatest photographers of all time. Who can argue with that? But Leica is also a club, like Ferrari or Rolex. It's social status, exclusivity, belonging to an elite... and i really don't give a sh*t about those things (because i'm poor, of course). But really, i want a camera that i'm not scared to use, to walk with, and there is a plethora, decades worth of cheap alternatives that will give you quality, reliability, ease of use... I don't need or even want a Leica. If i had one, i would probably sell it (after a few rolls...)
Very enjoyable video. I would rate it close to your best as far as content and being on point.
Thank you sir that really means a lot!
Wow, got my M3 for $850 from the Leica store nyc. They go for 2G’s now…. Hmm I also have an M9 from the same store in 2015. Not rich that’s for sure and I feel RUclips has shot up the used prices in the last few years to ridiculous levels. I really do enjoy shooting with these cameras a lot. But I do also like SLR’s and all varieties of medium format.
I do get what you’re saying on focusing with an SLR vs a rangefinder. They really are very different experiences I feel. SLR is more engaging I think.
You make interesting points, the cost alone is a deterrent for most, especially when the end result will be the same. If it's a size issue then a Canonet/Canon P will fit the bill. If you want a tiny SLR that works excellent, has a meter and is the same size as a canonet I highly recommend the Olympus OM2.
I understand your point. I had a M3, years ago, and didn't click with the rangefinder style of shooting. I was also constantly worried about scratching the lenses, which would have resulted in a substantial loss in value. I happily went back to my Japanese SLR's.
im thrifty because i'm a suckingly poor brazilian, i have a trip 35 that i bought for 80 reais (that would be 16 usd) that's my only film cam for now, but my dad has a zenit dslr with a lot of lens mold, thinking about buying an M42 adapter for my cheap sony A3000 and some m42 lenses in the future to use on the zenit too, my grandfather also had a yashica mat 124g that i actually used and loved it, a minolta srt102 with cranky shutter and mirror and another rangefinder olympus in a similar situation, i'd love to learn camera repair to fix those myself
Got mine a few years ago, no regrets. If any of my nices or nephews gets into photography they'll get it when im gone.
wow your kitchen is cool, love the handles i'm glad it's been kept in it's art deco design.
Sometimes one can dismiss a camera or lens and when you get your photos back the results change the way you feel about that. Wonder if you used it with fresh film and were photographing what you love something might make more sense when you see the results
I prefer slrs... I'm thrifty too... tried a Bessa, felt the great build but like Leica don't want to spend $$$ on one camera
I love the rangefinders in general but I prefer the SLR. I have a couple of rangefinders all from the 50's and 60's my favorite is the Voightlander Vito CL. Not a spectacular camera. Heavy for its size
and the image quality is good but not outstanding. However, it has the absolute best shutter sound. It "snicks" the shutter is like kitten purr, so damn cute. One cannot smile and say "aww" when that button is clicked.
I kinda want one and can afford one just fine, but I’m also perfectly happy using a beat up OM-1 and a rebel ti 🤷♂️
I’ll probably get one eventually though.
I just got an M3. Mostly because it was a screaming deal. It's fine.
Not the camera but the photographer that matters.
The photos matter.
I would buy one and just put it in a glass cabinet. Not a bad investment I guess.
Leicas are lovely, but I find shooting with rangefinders a miserable experience.
I have to agree with you there, I miss focus enough with an SLR 😂
Leica, not even once...
@1:34
You're "frugal"...
Leica is DEFINITELY not known for it's quality. They are literally some of the least reliable cameras on the market.
I have had the opposite experiences, while many cameras have broken on me, my old M models never have, so what experiences have you made that lead you to that conclusion?
@@justaboringjoha3678 Leica's come in for repair roughly triple the rate of other cameras. Since the late 80's they are a low reliability camera compared to anything Japanese made. I would be interested in hearing this long list of other cameras you've had break on you. I'm not saying that you're lying, but you're definitely intentionally misrepresenting Leica. Let me guess, your Leica's just happen to sit on the shelf while you actually used your "many" other cameras?
@@evrythingis1 Why so passive aggressive? And why saying I'm intentionally representing something with malus intent?
I agree that the Leicas from like the 80s aren't it, I own an M2 and M3 wich are older than the m4-2s and M6s
I had brake on me:
Minolta SRT 303
Minolta XE-1
Minolta XD-7
Minolta XD-5
Nikon FM
Olympus mju zoom
Canon AE-1 program
Canon EOS 100
2x Edixa mat Reflex
Exakta Varex 2b
Iloca IIc
I just think you misrepresent Leica by saying that they are not at all reliable, yes the Leitz Canada stuff isn't good and you can also forget about most of the R-series as well as all of the M5/M6 production, but older M models and Barnack type cameras I think are reliable.
I understand that as a service tech, always getting M6s that haven't been cla'd ever is annoying, as I can agree they really cheated out on them.
@@evrythingis1 Dude, are you not able to hold a normal conversation?
My M3 & M2 work perfectly fine and yes, Leica post M4 and Leicaflex SL2 sucks, but I think it's really just because people use them a lot without the cameras ever being serviced.
Also here the cameras from the top of my head that broke on me:
Minolta SRT 303
Minolta XE-1
Minolta XD-7
Minolta XD-5
Canon AE-1
Canon EOS 100
Olympus stylus epic zoom
Edixa Reflex
Edixa mat Reflex mod.B
Exakta Varex 2b
Nikon FM
Illoca 2c
@@justaboringjoha3678 Oh, so the Leica's issues are from being used a lot but not serviced, but the less expensive cameras that were actually commonly used a lot but not serviced had issues stemming from their name brand huh? Leica's are by far the least physically abused cameras on the market and their owners also get the most preventative maintenance done... You know in normal conversation you aren't supposed to personally identify with a brand like a walking advertisement right? It is not the 1960's anymore and you are misrepresenting reality.