Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/04/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi to all at LUG. I am a recent subscriber and after a couple of weeks of just reading, have decided to contribute. I have been a Photographer for over 25 years and have used Leica rangefinder cameras for 20 of those years. I guess I initially bought my first Leica because all those Photographers I admired seemed to use one and their reasons for using Leica tied in with the philosophy I wished to adopt for myself - to be able to work fast, quietly and unobtrusively in whatever lighting conditions and still come away with a useable negative; to see what I wanted to photograph as clearly as possible and to use a reliable camera which did just what I wanted it to do: record, on film that which I saw and wanted to preserve either for myself or for those who were paying me. The Leicas I have owned have helped me to achieve this in exactly the way that I imagined they would. Also, I loath things that do not work properly or perform to expected levels. Happily I have never had a problem with any Leica camera or lens I have owned and they have never let me down. With any camera or lens I have purchased it has never occurred to me to look for defects, the gear either works or it doesn't. I examine my negs and trannies as closely as anyone and I have never had reason to be concerned about scratches or at least that those that exist have been caused by the pressure plate in the camera. I can accept that some Leica equipment can be defective in some way or other, after all it is made by human beings, but I also believe that if you look hard enough and want to find something wrong then the chances are that you will. The point must be that if you have bought a Leica to enable you to work in a certain way and you take the time to learn how to use your camera and "get to know it" then whatever minor foibles it may have will become irrelevant. When you have worked with a certain camera/lens combination for long enough you get to know exactly what result you expect to see on film, you develop a feeling for the camera's operation and from that you are able to work with confidence in your equipment, if not yourself. It is my experience that every Leica I have owned and the Leicas that I currently work with all "feel" different. The shutter sounds different, depending on which lens is fitted and whether or not film is loaded in the camera. I have developed a way of working with the cameras that I suppose must take account of subtle variations in actual shutter speed, metering inaccuracies and environmental factors; natural light is an extremely variable factor - so when in doubt I bracket my exposures. Owning a Leica is not a guarantee of photographic infallibility nor is it insurance against equipment failure. If you abuse your cameras then you must accept that there is a greater chance of them breaking; conversely if you wrap them in cotton-wool or like to view them in a glass case then perhaps you should start the LCG (Leica Collectors Group). I really don't want to get personal here, but I would suggest that the best and perhaps only way I could imagine testing a new camera would be to load it with film and take some pictures. You would then be able to determine if the camera is performing "correctly" by the results on film. Worrying about the exact speed of the shutter or examining negatives under high intensity light sources and at peculiar angles to be able to "see" scratches is not what photography with Leica cameras is all about. At least not for me. In recent years I have managed to scale down my working "arsenal" to 3 bodies and 3 lenses. I no longer suffer from frozen shoulder syndrome. I can work quickly and because I'm less burdened with gear I find taking pictures with Leicas an altogether more pleasurable experience. Currently (and perhaps forever more) it is advantageous to remain as anonymous as possible when photographing on the street and the Leica remains the only camera of choice for those for whom that is an important pastime. Indeed for taking pictures where you would wish to have any chance of photographing without influencing the scene by having those in the picture react to being photographed, the Leica is supreme. I would be happy to be termed an amateur in the truest sense of that word and whilst I don't consider myself to be an "old-timer", I do still work on my prints in a darkroom with a V35. However, I have become fascinated with the possibilities of film scanners and would welcome any feedback on the Nikon LS30 versus the LS2000. I am very new to the whole thing of computers and have a ingrained suspicion of anything DIGITAL so any help in overcoming this would be welcome. Finally ( yes really), I would also welcome any discussion on any of the above, either via personal e-mail or on LUG. Jon Lister p.s. For those of you reading this who may know me: Hi, how are you? and for those whose portfolios I rejected whilst I was at the Indie , Remember: Life really is too short...