You don't need a Leica M6.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июл 2022
- I feel the culture of film photography online is either you should own an M6 or you're a subpar photographer. It's not true. You don't have to empty your bank account to use a Leica and have a similar experience.
Older Leica-M bodies are still killer. Weigh up the pros and cons for yourself, an M2 might have a max shutter of 1/500th but is it more valuable to you to have the cash on hand to buy a photography course or invest in your portfolio? I dunno, pay your car insurance with that money or something.
Don't rush everything. You'll be fine xx
I feel the m5 is the perfect representation of everyone’s photos shot on a Leica. And that’s why I love it.
I bought an M4 new in November of 1974. It's still my daily carry. I've found it to be reliable..
Unreal! Nearly 50 years on and kicking!
Had my M4 for a month now, this gives me even more confidence!
@@bradlspencer How about this one, I've bought my Rolleiflex in 61, still working
This flash is exactly what I was looking for a long time. Thanks!
mate my pleasure, get on it and drive that price up 😂
I’m about to get a CLA’d Leica iiif for $400. 😎 Can’t wait to have fun with it.
Wasn't expecting a great flash recommendation!
Thank you Brad
super welcome, hope its working out for you!
Why so much hate for the M5? I love mine! The metering is often called better than the M6 (the match needle gives more info than the LEDs in the M6) and it's highly accurate. The M5 was also the last M camera made in the traditional manner. Later Ms used less expensive materials and methods. And best of all, because of people who hate on them, the M5 is less expensive!
I bought my first M6 in 2002. It was $1200. It was so much money at the time for me. I bought a summicrom 35 f2 for another $800. SO all in it was $2000. My wife was all in for me getting it. I had a Nikon F100 that I shot with at the time. I sold my F100 for $500. So it wasnt crazy. At the time that was so much money for me. I still shoot with an M6. Not the original one I bought back then.
Film and lens is what matters most. Really good video! Thanks and greetings from Germany
For reportage, documentary, and street photography, for decades, I use the following Nikon lenses on my
Nikon SLR:
24mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
I also used a sound blimp for the times when I needed to suppress the SLR camera noise.
I really did not need a Leica, but when I was able to afford it, I purchased a Leica M6 with the following lenses:
21mm f/1.4 Leitz
35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon
90mm f/2 Leitz
It was not a fiscally justifiable purchase, but it fulfilled a lifelong dream.
I shoot a M4-P and like it a lot.
Honestly if someone (without a collection of M lenses) asked me for an economic alternative to an M6 I would recommend a Olympus OM-1 (and budget $200 to have the prism foam cleaned, a replacement focussing screen and the circuit adjusted for SR44 batteries). Total cost would be one tenth of an M body and the shooting experience is about as close as you can get with an SLR.
Hello, Perhaps are you in the UK? I have one OM1. Could you please tell me, or if anyone knows who does a circuit replacement? That would be great. Thank you in advance
@@kanjinha Ziggy at Nottinghill Camera did mine but that was a decade ago. Newton Ellis would be my choice now or speak with LCE their technicians might help.
@@mynewcolour many thanks
I just acquired an M4-P as well, it'll be my first Leica so I'm super excited. That said, just thought I''d throw another contender in that a lot of people still don't seem to consider when talking about affordable alternatives (more so for the M2-M4 cameras). The Canon P rangefinder, seriously the closest thing you can get to the shooting experience, build quality and in hand feel of a Leica rangefinder, plus the lenses are amazing. This also extends to the VI, VI-L, VL, VT etc models, but I can only speak from experience with my Canon P.
My 1st Leica was an m4p in 1995. It’s funny how the kids obsess about M6s, there all film cameras! And the pointless comparisons of m6 vs m11???
Great video and good points. I’ve heard repeatedly that the camera body is “just a light box” and although there’s some truth to that, the build quality of higher end Leica cameras is worth it if you can swing it as it is a lifetime investment. I actually agree that the M4 is a great alternative to the M6 but not the MP. The M6 has not as great quality materials as the M4 but the MP has better build quality than the M4 for sure. The MP is an M4 refresh basically. I justified getting an MP for myself from the perspective of build quality, newer materials and easier to repair though less likely to need it. You’d have to do a fair amount of shopping to find an M4 in excellent mechanical and cosmetic condition.
What typically goes wrong with M4s? Specific to Canada models? I’ve been lucky with mine 🤞🏼
The MP is closer to an M2 refresh than an M4 refresh. Besides the M4 has higher quality parts than a modern MP (the original mp is a different story) except for the viewfinder. The modern MP has a plastic film counter (prone to break), steel gears (m4 has brass gears) and a simplified rewind mechanism.
I've had 4 modern mp/m-a cameras that all had to be sent back within a month of ownership due to various issues. I have several older m cameras that never had any issue (m4, 2xM6, M2, M3).
Perhaps you are talking about the M4-P.
I was looking at buying the M6. Then it reminded me of expensive sports car. I would rather get a classic car if I am getting a sports car. These recommendation for a M4 is great. Thanks Brad
I'm starting to wish I got an M4 classic now 😂 everyone out here with an M4 and I got a dumbass M4-P
Love this video, just got myself a Leica CL with a Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f1.4 for just about $850 USD. In-built meter as accurate as my external meter and my phone meter app(guess i got lucky). 10/10 getting hate from other Leica users locally but it is such a great compact setup and I love saying I have a Leica and the other "real leica" owners just look disgusted lol. I've used an old IIIG,M5,M6,MP and M3 and they're all great in their own right, wouldn't call any of them superior over the other. Also plan on picking up older Leica glass that uses the M39 mount, an adapter is cheap so why not. Keep up the vids bro :D
nah stuff those leica purists brother. you dont need that. love what you use and it'll love you.
Take a careful notion of the Leitz inscription on the top of the Camera, the very best quality of Leica gear was those with the Leitz name on !!!
This is exactly what I was thinking.. Last 2 weeks I was bussy searching what I could get for around €2500-2900 and this is the set just without the flash. 👀
love that flash!
Great vidéo. I will subscribe. A little question. What film do you use ? I love the colors..
great video!! I use the good lux jr and have considered the light labs flash but I'm not sure how id use it without the guide. how do you know what your flash power should be on that flash??
This is the exact same setup I have minus the flash... I love it
Get on that flash and let’s be pals
Nice video! I use a Leicaflex SL2 from '77, not even an M body. Maybe one day I'll get one. If I do, it'll be an M3 or M4. I do like shooting with a rangefinder, but for now... I'm good with my SLR.
Lovely! Yes, their SLR’s are great too. I have a friend with a couple of the R’s and he loves them! Thanks for commenting :)
@@bradlspencer My pleasure! Keep shooting! Keep making videos! Looking forward to your next one.
Hey hey... I'm sub number 150. 🙂 Me thinks I'll play devil's advocate with some of what you said... just for fun. A quick note, that after seeing your presentation, I watched a few of your other vids. There's talent at work. I enjoyed your video storytelling. If you work on your YT channel, I can imagine you'll develop quite a following as another great ambassador for the land down under. But I digress.
Back around 1978 I was hired as a newbie wedding photog. The studio had a number of weekend warriors, for which we all owned our own equipment but was assigned jobs booked by the studio. I showed up on day one with my Canon AE-1, was introduced to a room full of other photogs, and was quickly introduced to the snobbery of equipment. Canons were Meh, i.e., for amateurs, Nikons were for pros, and Leica... the for the gods of photography. I still remember looking at a Leica rangefinder with collapsible lens, thinking it was so ugly and strange. But hey... what did a newbie teen know on his first day on the job?
I quickly fell in the camp that a camera was just a box that made no difference on picture quality, and the most expensive lens in the world doesn't look good if the photog missed focus (so easy with film cameras and open apertures). To your assertion that one does not need an M6, I'd argue that anyone dabbling in film need not spend money on any Leica, for there are many $100 options (body and lens) that will work fine. And at F8, one will be hard-pressed to see any difference in picture quality. For if the Leica pic misses focus by even a little, and the Nikon, Pentax, Minolta, etc., el-cheapo setup pic is a well-composed shot that's in focus, it will, hand's down, be the better result by anyone viewing the two pics side-by-side. That said, some great shots have been published that told a story despite missing focus, have won awards, etc., but this was purely composition and storytelling, for which any camera is just the method of capture.
So does equipment matter? I say absolutely yes. As a working pro, I didn't care about equipment. But as an amateur these days, I've never owned so much equipment. In fact, I've recently picked up a Contax RTX to replace the one that was stolen 30 years ago, An RTX II, built a collection of Contax Zeiss lenses, Leica R lenses, Zeiss ZE classics (all adapted to mirrorless), then went a little crazy with bodies, such as the Canon R5, Sony A7 IV, Lumix S5, and even the Lumix S1H. I also have a few RF lenses for the Canon, the cheapo ones (well, not cheap, but the F1.8s). And then... I was just gifted a Leica M4 with a Summicron 50mm of the same vintage. The M4 needs service, so I will be sending both, body and lens for a complete overhaul.
Why does equipment matter? Well, one could ask, is taking (or owning) pictures of friends, family, nature, etc., a necessity of life? If we really think about it, the answer is no. We need food and shelter, and protection from the elements (as well as bad people intent on doing us harm). For everything else, it's for our enjoyment; to bring us joy and happiness in life.
And thus, for many of us amateurs who get a bad case of G.A.S-ititus, it's the enjoyment of acquiring the equipment, playing with it, taking a few pics every now and then 🙂and doing really stupid things like pixel-peeping a vintage lens on a 45 MP sensor at 300% zoom (I'm so very guilty) that brings joy to the hobby. As for the M6 vs. other models, well, to each his or her own. There is a degree of seeking recognition and acceptance amongst our peers, and if those peers suggest a particular model over the other (which is reflected in demand, thus price), then who am I to argue? I still can't imagine people paying eight grand USD for a body... but that's just me. The R5 was a very tough purchase because I knew I didn't "need" to spend almost $4K on a body when the EOS R took great pics, but I do enjoy using it. In fact, once I got that R5, I never used the R again (smooth sound of the shutter alone), and ended up trading it for the S1H plus cash.
Regarding film, I spent my entire career dealing with the shortcomings of film, especially the lower resolution of 35mm vs medium format (spent years working with a Hassie). I yearned for the capabilities of digital and was "wowed" time and time again by what could be done with digital imagery. The last studio I worked was one of the first to transition to digital. They purchased the full frame, 11.1 MP Canon EOS-1Ds which set the studio back an ungodly $8,000 (or thereabouts). And now that film is scarce and expensive, I'm looking forward to giving it a try again. I hope your prediction that film will become extinct is wrong, but do worry the same.
So it seems there's something counter-intuitive, when on one hand, we seek out ever higher MP cameras that can see in the dark, seek out ultra sharp lenses, etc., then use vintage lenses for their imperfections, and film for an esthetic that's departs from the realm of such accurate realism provided by modern equipment. To that end, I'm looking forward to trying out the M4 when it comes back from repair, most likely with monochrome film. Fun stuff.
Lots to unpack here… what I will say is that this video is not potentially for a ‘beginner-amateur’ photographer, but more for those who are in it for a while and are caught in a trap of constantly upgrading. I’ve been there too and what I’m more seeking to do is to validate those who might want the flashy stuff, but don’t have the budget. My desire is that those who don’t have a huge following or bank account are seen and know they can still produce great work, while still operating in the same sphere as other Leica users if they’d like to be, without spending all their money. I think there’s an online attitude of “I NEED this” when in reality you can get by with something different - at least thats the heart behind this video
I have quite a collection myself now of both film and digital stuff, while I’d say I could get by with one or two mainly, I have a video kit and a stills kit as I’m a hybrid wedding shooter and street photography is more of a hobby or something I’d like to pursue further in the future.
This profession or hobby is expensive, but we can be smart about it and I’m just here to help 😎
@@bradlspencer Of course you're right and I do agree with your well-made points; just having a bit of fun by playing devil's advocate... which is in no way justifying spending beyond one's means. If I ever take the dive and attempt to produce online content, I'd do things like pitting my 8MP Canon Rebel Xt, now worth less than $50.00 (my first digital camera) vs. the R5. Also, once the Leica M4 comes back from repair, I'd like to do a film camera shootout pitting the Contax RTS vs M4, i.e., pitting the Summicron Rigid 50mm vs. the Contax Zeiss 50mm 1.4. I did compare the 1960s Rigid M mount vs. the R mount version of the 50mm cron by adapting both to the R5, and found the M a tad sharper and better contrast than the R version, closer to the character of the Contax Zeiss. But then again, this is playing with equipment vs. going out and taking great pictures. 📷🎞🎥And I think this proves your point... get out there and shoot with whatever you have.
Bought an M6TTL LHSA for just under $3000AUD back in 2011. So glad I have held onto it for all this time. Probably wouldn't really consider jumping an m6 given the insane jump in prices
thats wild. $4000 minimum today haha
The M4 is fantastic. It looks just as good or better than the M6. Wrt lenses, I would say the TTartisan 50mm 1.4 is steller, better than most of the vintage Leica lenses. The only drawback is that it is quite big and heavy.
Looks like the prices have gotten closer between the M6 and M4-P. Current M4-p prices are close to 3 grand Australian.
frick
A bit younger, and not (yet) owner of a Leica, also shooting both film and digital, I loved to play a game with fellow photographers - sometimes I added false camera and lens info into a picture note... and then, with pictures from 50 years old Nikkormat and a Nikkor-S 50/1.4, pretending they're from M6 and Summilux-M 50, I received those comments about the famous Leica glow, Leica character etc.; same with digital and fake black & white grainy pics... with it, I did it also for one exhibition, mixing prints from 6mpx digital (many many years ago, when everyone was saying it's too little for enlarging) with analog film prints, both printed in a high end lab... nobody was able to tell, praising the awesome dynamic range and film grain. Cognitive biases...
So, you don't even need a Leica. If you're - for whatever reason - after a rangefinder, and can live with just 50mm lens (or external finders; I very much like FED 2 + Voigtlander Snapshot-Skopar 25/4), small finder & worse focusing experience, even the Russian Leica clones can take pretty impressive pics and are much more reliable and easier to adjust and/or repair than any M-series Leica; the lenses are great too, esp. early Jupiters 50/2, you can buy a bunch for $100, pick the best one (typically the one that has not been amateurishly cleaned before), and then manually collimate the lens to that particular camera, to achieve a perfect focus. Henri Cartier Bresson and other famous photographers of the era used technologically and optically equal (even inferior) cameras to shoot their most iconic pics. Or, you can use the fixed-lens rangefinders, such as Minolta HiMatic; some of them have pretty solid optics, some not distinguishable in real-world conditions from Leica glass of the same era. Equal, or even larger, amount of iconic pictures were shot on Nikons, Minoltas, Canons... or even Exaktas, such as in the case of a famous Magnum photographer Josef Koudelka.
I understand not everyone, and especially not the younger photographers, is able to learn this lesson themselves... It took me many many years of shooting, collecting cameras, and occasionally even shooting test targets and comparing the results to realize how much people are affected by their cognitive biases. But they are, and even I am, often trying to blame my skills to insufficient equipment. Bullshit, I try to remind myself, think of all those Koudelkas, Bressons, McCurrys, Arbuses... even my most favorite photographer, Ralph Gibson, admittedly shot some of his iconic pics on non-Leica cameras.
Yes! FED-2! Those things OWN.
Awesome words, really true. i love it
I just don’t want people dumpstering money just because it’s what the RUclipsrs use! Love to you
I've owned every Leica film body before the prices jumped past $1400USD. Good and real advice found here. (Although, once you see and hold an M5 in person, you realize it's the real deal). That Q flash has been solid for me, as well as the Keks meter. I was secretly looking to troll you, but you are one of the few legit Tubers I've watched. Cheers!
Troll me.
Appreciate your comment, just trying to get something useful out there!
Why the M6. What’s the fascination with a Leica that gets Fugly when the zinc top plate oxidizes. At least the M2/3/4/4-2/4P are all brass.
I think the M5 is the best analog Leica M. I love taking photos with it. The most beautifully is the M3 or the MP. The M6 is inbetween. But the most famous. So I hope Leica will sell a lot of M6s so that Leica earns enough money for new exciting projects. We don´t need the M6 but Leica do it. :)
M5 is a Minolta hybrid. I owned an M6 back in the 80s (USD $1800, an unheard-of king’s ransom back then). However it conflicted with my primary system, Canon. After 7 months I sold it as I was rarely shooting it. At the end of the day, it was a vanity thing, with delusions of becoming another Bresson or Winogrand. Frankly the mythos of the Red Dot has faded over time and some 30+ years later I am quite happy with my Fuji X-Pros. As stated most people (clients) could care less about what rig go have, just get the job done.
on vanity: i think this is definitely the case when it comes to film photography -- anything will do. as for these days, I really like what leica is doing with their digital lineup. the M-11 is something that i think canon, sony, prosumer brands will look at for reference on new models. i think what i enjoy about them so much is that they have both an eye set on the past and the future. they stick to a more traditional form of photography physically, while internally pushing the boundaries a bit.
the x-pro is almost a perfect compromise in my eyes. some fuji cameras even look like a leica haha.
thanks for your response and viewership!
The M5 is not a Minolta hybrid. The CL is the Minolta Hybrid.
That’s still a lot of money for most regular people. I’d love to try a Leica one day but I just don’t see how they are worth the money, as nice as they are.
I agree. It's just too much. For 2000/3000 bucks I would get a ton of more interesting and smaller cameras. I'm sure there are plenty of rangefinder alternatives. Get a Fed-2 with voigtlander and KMZ glass and you're very likely pretty golden.
I liked the video for the beat alone
Finally some sense over the leica marketing. The fanboys, like all fanboys, are obnoxious
I’m definitely a shill, but im a bit more level headed about it haha
what films do you use?
Bravo oooo you totally right ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
M5 looks great imo. People pay extra for Leicas in black and without the red dot- the M5 has both of those things at no additional cost. The M6, on the other hand, actually *is* kind of ugly, with its double branding on the front.
Or buy Minolta 🔴
Saw that kei light meter and said subscribe
We out here. Love to you
Perhaps not. But I want one. And that is the point of Leica.
Neat vid, Brad. Any Leica is outta my price range!
I believe in you x
The ultimate power move is shooting with Leica glass on some cheapo soviet rangefinder
M4 is now $2500. Leica gear that won’t bankrupt is called Nikon f2/3!
different style camera entirely.
Film is going to die out soon + 28mm? Get the Q2 used. Just my thoughts if you’re a 28mm shooter.
See my other videos big dog 😉
You should only buy a Leica M camera if you are after a range finder, it fits your style of photography and above all know how to use it comfortably. Otherwise, do yourself a favour and buy an SLR. Leica Ms are very limited in what you can actually do with them. I am a Leica M and M digital owner for a longtime, and please accept it from me that I know what I am talking about. Besides, unless you can afford those super expensive Leica M lenses you will never get that ' Leica Look ' whatever that might be. Don't get caught in the hype that surronds the Red Cricle.
facts
funny got an m4p 2 weeks ago
Good cop sir
Leica M4-P in good condition 2500euro, Leica M6 in good condition 2600euro. I don't think the price should be the deciding factor between these two bodies
You’re dreaming
@@bradlspencer in what way?
@@JacobChristiansen1 there's no way the price is that close haha. the EURO to AUD is incredibly bad. 2600 EURO = $3600 AUD.
The M6 is going for $3800-4000+ AUD.
I did just find that the M4-P has skyrocketed though. I picked up mine for $2200 AUD and they're now reselling for $2800-3300 AUD.
@@bradlspencer looking in euro on eBay those are the prices (in Europe at least) and it’s the same locally where I live (Denmark) the M6 has reached an invisible ceiling and although some people try to sell them higher they rarely sell for more than around 2600eur.
If you’re already spending 2000+ euro I don’t think you can say that the one, that is at most 200-400euro cheaper, is the budget option.
"I feel the culture of film photography online is either you should own an M6 or you're a subpar photographer. " If you feel this, you need to change your community. And get a Zorki.
2000/3000 bucks will get you a collection of interesting, fun and very usable cameras.
i sure wish i could change the international online culture on my own...
Funny you mentioned that film is going to die soon anyway, I know you said it jokingly, but with Kodak's retarded prices, yes it will
In some ways i meant it as a joke, but there are trends that come and go every few years and it will be one of them haha
Erm, I use an M5 😂
Actually, you're a subpar photographer if you shoot the M6 and cannot afford a Leica MP. ;)
Finally a truther