Leica 35mm or MF - DPChallenge Forums

09/30/2006 11:37:59 PM · #1

I think I've decided I'm going to sell my DSLR and most of my lenses for a film camera system, but I'm not sure if I want a Leica M6 rangefinder and a 50mm 2.0 Summicron, or a medium format body with a ~40mm and an 80mm. I guess the MF would be better for landscapes, but would I be able to get good enlargements (16x20 or so) from the Leica since the lens is so good? I don't shoot entirely landscapes, and I'm keeping my film camera and probably fisheye and 70-210.

One advantage to 35mm is I know I can get it scanned locally, and developed if it's print film.

If I do go MF, what systems do you guys think would be good? Bronica seems to be pretty cheap, are the lenses decent? Hasselblad is probably great, but would I be able to get a 500 series body and those two lenses (or just the wide) for under about $1200?
Pentax? Mamiya?

Thanks

xianart

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

09/30/2006 11:45:03 PM · #2

i loved my leica. just make sure you ensure it...

Message edited by author 2006-09-30 23:45:16.

agenkin

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

Nikon MF Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AIS

10/01/2006 12:11:33 AM · #3

A gutsy move, to dump digital. I, too, am contemplaiting buying a decent film camera (although I do not plan to abandon digital, at least not right away). If I were to buy a 35mm SLR, it would definitely be a Nikon FM3a; the fact that I already have a few good Nikon lenses is something that sways me this way. But I do a lot of street photograhy, so I am also thinking about rangefinders, and, from what I see, the Leica M series rules the show, but I hear that the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders are also quite good, and cost less than Leicas. I've heard good things about Pentax medium format systems, to the effect of affordable and quality optics. Sorry, I can't be very useful in your decision. It's just that I am sitting on the fence, too.

10/01/2006 12:34:09 AM · #4

I don't know how long I'd go without another digital camera - I'd probably get a Sony 717 or something so I could still enter challenges.

I'm planning on keeping my Canon 1N SLR, and would probably buy a 5D or 1Dmk2N when I start working again.

I'm leaning toward medium format for its practicality for landscapes, even though I would LOVE to have a Leica, and an excited attitude when shooting makes a huge difference in the quality of anyone's work IMO.

It looks like Bronica lenses aren't too shabby, and the bodies are practically dirt cheap. I can get a SQ-A, 40mm f/4 and 150mm f/4 for less than $1000, and (limited) reading shows that those lenses aren't bad, and the body is just a box with a hole on one end and some knobs to control how long the hole stays open anyway...

I'll look into Pentax too.

eschelar

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/05/2006 05:53:11 AM · #5

My old neighbor had a bronica system that he sold for a couple grand that had 6 lenses and a metering system on top.

We didn't take any pictures with it, but he let me play around with it for a bit.

You actually can do a fair bit with it once you get used to it.

I think there are also some smaller and cheaper MF systems like Seagull that you can get to experiment with for a while if you wanted to.

If you want to get a Bronica system, expect to pay a lot for anything new.

Around here, the bronica systems in the second hand shops are all around 800 USD and the lenses range from around the same to around double that.

Falc

Canon EOS-1D Mark III

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

10/05/2006 06:30:56 AM · #6

I just bought a Widelux F7, its a panoramic swing lens camera and uses standard 35mm film. Its a great little toy, but will never replace my 5D. I couldn't stand the wait for the results ;-)

quiet_observation

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

10/05/2006 06:41:52 AM · #7

If your only concern is printing at 16x20 you should be able to accomplish this with 35 mm film.

One thing you might consider is portability or weight of the camera. Do you want to be able to handhold the camera? Are you satisfied with always being on a tripod?

eschelar

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/05/2006 06:58:38 AM · #8

Yeah, that could be a bit of an issue too... The bronica that my friend sold had to be stored in a HUGE bag because of all the equipment that he had with it including two film backs and a polaroid back and a full set of filters and....

Probably 4-5 times bigger than I need to take my 30D and 4 lenses with my filters and toys and tripods.

His spare bag was the largest bag that Lowepro makes.

You might start with a fairly modest kit, but it does get big.

Hopefully if you go with something that big, you would have a car to work from... I can't imagine dealing with this on anything else.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 06:59:34.

hyperfocal

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 105mm f/2.5 AIS

10/05/2006 07:59:23 AM · #9

When everyone is speaking of Bronica are you talking about the SLRs (ETR, SQ, GS) or their 645 rangefinder? It seems strange to be comparing a very lightweight rangefinder to a very large SLR (even the ETR). However the Bronica rangefinder had a very well built RF system, that is actually smaller than most pro 35mm/digital SLRs. The 45mm can even be used without the external viewfinder since the built-in viewfinder provides aprox the same coverage albeit without the frame lines. The whole three-lens kit can fit into a small fanny pack style case such as the Lowepro Orion. Prices for their rangefinder haven’t came down as much as their SLRs, but it can be had for less than you would probably spend on the Leica.

Personally if I were facing the same dilemma I’d go for either the Mamiya 7 MF (or the 6 if you like square like I do). It is a great system with incredible lenses and the ability to shoot 35mm panos. Both cameras are quite physically large, but are quite light. Currently no digital camera based on 35mm cameras can come close to the resolution of 6x7 with a good scanner. Just my $.02, good luck.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 08:00:00.

10/05/2006 08:33:25 AM · #10

i say keep the digital stuff ... buy a seagull medium format for $140.00 and a Canonet Rangefinder for like $75. Use them for about a month, and I'm thinking you'll be happy you kept your digital stuff.

just my opinion, though.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 08:35:52.

10/05/2006 11:28:54 AM · #11

I know they aren't similar at all. The main idea I have in photography is to always try new stuff - equipment wise, and technique/style wise.

If I get the Leica, I'll probably shoot more candids and hike into spots more for landscapes.
With the MF, I'd shoot pretty much just landscapes with it, but probably wouldn't go more than a mile or so from the car because it's so heavy. Although Ansel Adams brought his large format gear along with him all over the place, hiked up mountains and all that...

Handhold would ideally be nice, but I will have a 35mm SLR in either case. It might seem a little redundant to get another 35mm though, and to be honest I can already get most of the shots that I could with the Leica by throwing on the 50mm and switching to MF and M mode.

hopper: I've gone cheap most of my life in photography, and pretty much learned my lesson that I get what I pay for, and if I'm not happy with my stuff, I won't go to the trouble to shoot most of the time.

I would be buying used, definitely. I looked at Mamiya stuff, and it looks like the bodies are better than Bronica, and the lenses might be as well.

10/05/2006 11:44:36 AM · #12

true, you get what you pay for.

my suggestion to "go cheap" was just to make sure you enjoy using that type of equipment before making any radical changes.

i bought a canonet for $50, i just finished changing the light seal and haven't even put a roll of film thru it, yet ... and I can already tell it's not gonna get much use (not really smaller than my dslr, not really as "silent" as they say, not all that light). I'm glad I spent the $50, though, rather than 3 to 5 hundred on a bessa.

i'm a 100% believe in the "you get what you pay for" way of life :)

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

hopper: I've gone cheap most of my life in photography, and pretty much learned my lesson that I get what I pay for, and if I'm not happy with my stuff, I won't go to the trouble to shoot most of the time.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

10/05/2006 11:46:43 AM · #13

also, i didn't see you mention a scanner ... a good one isn't cheap, and you're gonna want one

fotodude

Nikon D70

10/05/2006 11:48:22 AM · #14

with out a doubt you should go with leica option...

_brando_

edit to say- A Mamiya645 is a great camera most all my frinds have them...and love them, i've worked with one or 2 in my time and got nothing but great quolity images back...that would be my advice for a meidum formatt that won't break the bank with a lens or 2....but meidum formatt scanners are pricy so watch out...you'd be better off going 35mm...or sending your images out to get scaned till ou recover from the camera's cost. most MdF. scanners will run around a grand....for a good one that is. still i have friends who have pulled it off without eating for awhile...lol.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 11:55:01.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

10/05/2006 11:59:27 AM · #15

Pentax 67!!! It's a medium format SLR.

edit to add link

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 12:08:33.

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

10/05/2006 12:13:43 PM · #16

Originally posted by LoudDog:

Pentax 67!!! It's a medium format SLR.

edit to add link

So are the Hassleblad, the Bronica and the Mamiya.

The Pentax 6x7 form factor is like a 35mm SLR. Perhaps that is what you meant. The main drawback to the Pentax 6x7 is the 1/25 of a second flash sync, unless you buy a lens with the internal shutter.

I saw a Hassleblad 500CM with an 80MM T* and 120 film back the other day for $800. That used to set you back $3000 or more.

Message edited by author 2006-10-05 12:14:09.

lament

Pentax K100D

Pentax FA 50mm F1.7 AF

10/05/2006 12:24:30 PM · #17

Does Leica have any actual advantages over anything, other than people being in love with it too much?

darnok

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

10/05/2006 12:41:12 PM · #18

Originally posted by lament:

Does Leica have any actual advantages over anything, other than people being in love with it too much?

The leneses are exceptional, and the camera runs like a swiss watch.

hyperfocal

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 105mm f/2.5 AIS

10/05/2006 01:42:55 PM · #19

Originally posted by lament:

Does Leica have any actual advantages over anything, other than people being in love with it too much?

I used to be able to handhold my M4 at 1/8 second with a 50mm and sometimes even 1/4 secound with a wideangle. Can't do that with a SLR.

10/05/2006 01:57:06 PM · #20

True, I will need a scanner. Is the Canon 8400F for $130 decent? It scans slides and negs with an adapter, but if the quality is trash I'll try to fit a Coolscan V or so into my budget (although that's only 35mm)

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

10/05/2006 02:01:56 PM · #21

You could always get the new Leica M8 Digital rangefinder. 10.3 mp, iso 160 to 2500, flash synch at 1/250. UK price £2,999 (body only)

:-)