Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/12/06
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hello, I am watching the LUG digest for a couple of weeks and now place my first message. I prefer the digest because it is more convenient than receiving hundreds of individual e-mails every day. For living I am with a firm of water & wastewater engineers working on donor funded projects in developing countries, newly industrialised countries etc. As such I travel a lot and to places which usually do not get any attention from tourists. Even if I go to tourist places I usually have not the time for an extensive sight seeing programme. On the other hand I enjoy the fact that I see foreign countries from another point of view and of course, I take pictures. But I take pictures besides travelling and working, but I do not travel in order to make pictures. Consequently, my pictures are not of the safari, macro or landscape type. Getting to the right place, waiting for the right weather or angle of sunlight, all of that with a load of gear is not my cup of tea and I leave that to the more dedicated travel photographers. I prefer to simply record pictures of my environment and of the people I meet. As a late teenager; I started about 1980 with a "Revue 400SE" rangefinder, probably a rebadged Minolta hi-matic with a quite fast 40/1,7 lens which served me well for almost 10 years. From time to time and I am still doing that, I went to a photo shop to check some of the modern (AF) SLRs, but I never liked the plastic feel and the complexity of operations with all the "modes" and "programming". After my experience with a rangefinder camera combined with that fast 40/1,7, SLRs never were a first option for me. Point-and-shoots were no option either, because I disliked the slow lenses. Even with my cheapo Revue aka Minolta hi-matic I was able to get very nice in-door shots at low light and without flash. After having earned some money on my first decent job, I decided to invest in a "demo" Leica M6 with a used 1,4/35 (non aspherical). At the time the decision to purchase of a M6 gear was quite something, but I argued to myself that you should buy your Leica when you are young and you will be able to utilise most of a Leica's 40+ years of life expectancy instead of passing it to ignorant children. After playing with the M6, a R3 and lenses in between 21mm and 180mm my favourite travel kit now comprises a M2 with the 1,4/35 (non aspherical) and a SL with a 1,4/80. Generally, 2 out of 3 pictures I take with the 1,4/35. To get easier results I changed from slides to consumer colour negative (Kodak Gold or Fuji Superia in the 400 or 800 ASA range, depending which is on sale at the time of purchase) and b&w (HP5, XP2) which I get processed at my local dealership (Kodak Royal Paper or the Fuji equivalent, depending on the shop). I usually avoid the very cheap drugstores and the one-hour-labs, but neither for my lenses nor for my film and printing I go for "apo", "asperical" or otherwise "pro"-quaility. I thing it is a commonly shared opinion that a Leica M2, M4 or M6 is best with a 35mm lens. Shorter lenses require accessory finders, longer; fast lenses are bulkier and difficult to focus. From the 35mm lenses the pre-aspherical 1,4/35 is my all-time favourite. For the kind of pictures I am doing, handheld and with fast film, its optical performance is ok and I highly appreciate its compact size, even with the hood attached. However, under some conditions there are flare and reflection when used at full aperture. Stopped down and under bright daylight, there is no problem at all. With negative film, I am confident to guestimate the exposure setting and therefore I do not regret the lack of a TTL meter with my M2. In case of doubt, I still have my SL to work as a spot meter for confirmation. Its meter is not very sensitive, with 400ASA it will show nothing slower than 1/30" and 1/1,4. However, I am good in estimating in dim light but not so good in estimating for cloudy daylight or for shadows in bright daylight. Generally I like the convenience of a second body for the tele lens. I preferred the SL over the SL2, any R or a second M because it was cheap, all mechanical and with its bigger body feels better with the heavy lenses. For use with the SL I was lucky to find an early, very reasonably priced 1,4/80 with three cams. On the later versions, the SL/SL2 cam was omitted and, according to my handbook, cannot be refitted. This focal length is one of the most useful for SLRs and perfect to complement the M2 with the 1,4/35. The fast 1/1,4 is not only good for dim light, but provides a bright finder and easy focussing under any light condition. You can use the whole groundglass area (and not only the rangefinder window or the split image indicator) for focussing which is very convenient for doing portraits. As a combo, the M2/1,4/35 and the SL/1,4/80 offer the best out of the rangefinder and SLR world. Moreover, I was able to purchase this set at a very reasonable price. Although I am rarely using my M6 now, I prefer to keep it as a back-up in case my M2 gets stolen or breaks Hans-Peter