[Leica] Is the Leica an endangered species?

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

Some statistics make for interesting reflections.
The photographic industry has consumed more silver this year than last
year. The first positive conclusion might be: silver holds off the digital
threat. But then it dawns: the mass market for silver is colour print area
and here indeed we note higher figures. Black and white and Transparancy
just hold or are slipping.
The digital camera still and righly so is seen as a computer peripheral and
has limited use and limited appeal. The essential advantage of silver based
materials over the digital print is the image depth. Look at a carefully
printed fiberbased paper and compare it with a very good  digital print:
the last one lacks depth and substance.
APS now has 25% of the compact market and ever optimistic Fuji declares the
135 format dead within 4 years.
Truth of the matter is that digital pictures and APS will carve away
substantial portions of the 135 domain.
We also see a surging interest in old pictures and a lively trade in second
hand  mechanical "classics".

What relevance has this listing for Leica cameras and its use.

The Leica has optics whose qualities are second to none and at this very
moment are so evolved that a solid technique is needed to exploit these
qualities. Shooting objects  with fill-in flash on colour neg film is not
the best way to make these optical qualities shine.
The Leica also has picture taking qualities that define that style of
photography that is sometimes referred to as the art of the snapshot. Here
we need a keen eye on composition and a strong relation with our subjects
in order to rise above the commonplace.

The Leica then is an instrument, a tool and as every tool needs to be used
in those circomstancs for which the tool has been designed. It is
indicative of most LUG discussions that they are tool-oriented (which lens
is best, which film etc). Quite often it has been stated (with a large part
of merit) that in many picture taking situations the differences between
Zeiss and Canon are small compared to Leica. That is true. There is a large
intersection of photographic technique and subjects where the differences
do not count.

So why is the Leica in danger? The traditional scope of 35mm photography
will shrink (se above APS and digital). But within this contracted domain
the discerning characteristics of Leica photography  will be progressively
blurred unless the Leica users do what all businesses do today: reflect on
basic qualities and exploit the core of their craft and expertise.

Oddmund used a certain style of street photographuy and noted that a simple
compact camera was all he needed and so stopped using the Leica (so he told
us). That is a sensible act. If the tool is not correct for the job, than
change the tool.

The LUG may not be representative of the Leica users world wide. Still this
group consists of highly loyal and dedicated Leica users.

The discussion I would like to start would concentrate on what this group
(especially the large silent majority) thinks are the real virtues of Leica
photography and how or in what way Leica pictures are different from
others. Most interesting however would be a discussion of technique. What
techniques do Leica users prefer to get that most ephemeral of qualities:
Leica quality.
OR the other way around: what techniques should we use to get this quality.
I for one never use film speeds above 100ISO, always Transparancy and B&W
(zone system, yes) and as soon as the shutter speed drops below 1/125 a
tripod is a must. If in low light situations and when circomstances demand
handheld shooting  I make at least 10 identical pictures (every one of them
refocussed) to ensue exactt focus and control trembling hands.I always try
to find a light direction that enhances contours and texture detail. Never
use an aperture smaller than f/8.0 and preferably between 2,8 and 4. Etc

Erwin.