Over on the Leica Board at photo.net was posted this message yesterday
where a long-time Nikon user converted part of his camera usage to a Leica
M3. Given the recent discussion of bokeh, etc and the Leica disease vs.
the Zuikoholic disease, I thought this might be an interesting aside.
The original thread is at
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003sPx
Skip
==========================================================================
Observations of a recent Leica M convert
Well, in the last two weeks I've made what was at first a rather jarring
transition to shooting with a Leica M3 from a Nikon F4e. At this point I'd
just like to offer a few observations about my experience thus far with the
legendary Leica M.
First and foremost, the most significant change I've noticed is how much
less I think about the camera when I'm shooting now. I've been shooting
with Nikons for about 5 years now, and am very comfortable with the system.
That said, I now realize how much I still think about what I'm doing, in a
mechanical sense, shooting with an F3 or F4. With the M3, however, the
camera pretty much seems to fade into the background of what I'm doing, and
that's really nice. Granted, there are a few minor handling issues to sort
out, but those will pretty much be solved with a Voigtlander VC meter and
one of Tom Abrahamsson's rapidgrips.
I would have thought the transition to rangefinder focusing would have been
a bit more difficult, but apparently not. As with the general handling and
operation of the camera, focusing doesn't seem to be something I have to
devote a lot of mental energy to. Which, again, is nice.
And, finally, the glass. Now, I've shot with at least 4 different 35mm
systems, 5 different medium format systems, and any number of large format
optics ranging from brand new offerings from Schneider to old wet plate-era
lenses, so I've gotten to use a fair number of different lenses. Each
brand, and indeed each lens, certainly seems to have its own
characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. I've never been disappointed
with Nikon glass, and in fact still love it to death. Leica lenses, given
the near-fanatical (or maybe just fanatical) praise of some Leica devotees,
might seem to an outsider to be someting of epic proportions in terms of
quality. Having now shot with Leica glass myself, I must say that while it
is certainly no magic bullet, and that at least as much of the advantages
of Leica lenses are subjective rather than 'factual,' I will say that Leica
glass does not disappoint. Having now directly compared results from my old
50/1.4 Nikkor S?C and my new 50/1.4 Summilux, there is definitely a
different look to the Leica negatives ? and I like it. Not a difference I
would call astounding in any sense of the word, but perhaps wonderful in
its subtlety. I'm beginning to understand the hype.
And that's what I think at the moment. I do believe that this could become
quite expensive quite rapidly. Now all I have to do is finish working out
plans for that add-on focusing tab... Cheers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|