If you are moderately interested in photography, you will know the names like Canon, Nikon, and probably also Olympus, Pentax and now Sony (formerly Minolta.) But there is one other name that beyond all others seems to stir up a hornet’s nest of illicit passion — Leica. Those that have them rave over them and are caricatured as “fondlers” and generally quite bonkers, and those that don’t are regarded as the enemy to the Leica hardcore fraternity. Nothing stirs more passion than the M8.2’s price tag of £4000 for a crop framed sensor body, nothing unsettles the Canon/Nikon shooter more than hearing that a f/1.4 lens can cost How Much! And what you hear just about everybody who buys one is that now they are a believer, that there is nothing else now for them.
A Leica M2. My Leica M2. With a MR meter attached to the top.
I bought one this week, an old 1959 M2 — highly regarded by many, and for a 49 year old camera (50 soon) it was £300. And that for its condition is regarded as cheap. Let’s put that in context, I *think* you can buy the Nikon D40 with a kit 18-55mm brand new for that. You can probably also source the Canon EOS 1000D body for that. And £300 of Leica M2-ness gets you a fully mechanical, meter-less body which on the face of it, looks like a raw deal for me, the M2 owner.
But you see, it isn’t when it’s in the hands of someone who appreciates what it is, and why they’ve bought it (certainly not to fondle.) Let’s get this out of the way, the Leica is a fantastic bit of a kit, quiet, smooth working and a mechanical marvel but it’s not the holy grail of life, it doesn’t solve the mysteries that keep you awake in your pensive moments, and it doesn’t even do the dishes (what a swizz!) But what it does do, it promises to do well.
I say promises because I haven’t even got a lens to try out on it yet! So what’s all the fuss, why a rangefinder (what the heck is one, some ask) and why unlike some I intend to take this camera literally on walks of hundreds of miles…What is a rangefinder? I’m probably not best placed to answer this and I am sure someone else will correct me and know better. The most common camera that someone ‘upgrades’ to after a point and shoot is a SLR these days (single lens reflex) — sometimes prefixed with a D for Digital but seeing as photography is photography regardless of the capturing method (namely film or digital mostly) — this is what people will go for if they want to up their game. With a SLR you actually look through the lens through the clever use of an angled mirror and a pentaprism which reflects the light marvelously into the viewfinder. Some cheaper SLRs use pentamirrors which is a series of small mirrors in the SLR’s hump to do the same thing as a pentaprism but cheaper. Ignoring the downsides of pentamirrors vs. pentaprisms, the SLR is a fantastic tool. When you release the shutter, the mirror flips up (hence the reflex) and exposes the sensor/film behind it when the shutter curtain opens. Great. The downside here is noise from mirror slap and the fact that most SLRs are large and not particularly light. Some exceptions exist with the likes of Canon’s Rebel series, Nikon D40(x) and Olympus OM/Four Thirds systems which are small, quite light and quiet. The downside bar the Olympus’ is usually build quality.
A second is focusing in low light. Auto focus has improved immeasurably but even with the top flight, auto focus has the tendency to hunt for light and you have to resort to manual focusing, which without a split prism focusing screen can become tricky at wide apertures.
Enter the rangefinder. Some people want a light pocketable camera, that often these days can support high quality interchangeable lenses, and offer accurate focusing in low light. A fully coupled rangefinder (and this is where my technical knowledge lets me down) superimposes a bright patch over the image you see in the main viewfinder. This bright patch is a duplicate image which when overlaid allows you to focus by using the focusing ring on the lens to merge the viewfinder and bright patch’s image together. When perfectly aligned, the image is in focus. Because of this bright patch, it is easier to focus in poor light at wide apertures. A downside to rangefinders is that the viewfinder shows a fairly accurate angle of view for a preset range of lenses, unlike a SLR which shows you everything* for whichever lens is attached.
Enter the Leica. In my case I went for an M2. Without wishing to go into minute detail, its closest relative is the M3. The M3 has framelines (that is approximations of the angle of view) for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. Not useful for me as I wanted at least 40mm as I appreciate a mild wild angle for landscapes. The M2 has framelines for 35mm, 50mm and 90mm — just about perfect as this covers my most used focal lengths.
So why have I ended up with a rangefinder along with my EOS 3 SLR? Weight.
When you are walking any distance, especially over a period of a number of days when you are already carrying a great weight with you; it becomes very easy to put the camera on your pack and when a moment arises towards the end of the day, tired, hungry and with no energy left it is easy to shrug off taking what would otherwise be a great photograph. This became apparent to me very clearly (and certainly afterwards) this summer when I walked the South Downs Way.
One moment stands out more than others. It was only on the second day, but it had been the hottest day of the year at nearly 90 degrees and walking 18 miles in that kind of heat, up and down with a heavy pack took it out of me. By quarter to seven, I was about 45 minutes from my destination in South Harting. I had just crossed the Hampshire/West Sussex border and crossed a small road, immediately ahead of me were some gorgeous stables. Glistening in the cloak of English summer evening sun, spangling and glowing with an ethereal nature. Midges buzzing in the hedges and dust on the track, and a horse looking out at the dishevelled character with a heavy pack. Me.
The EOS 3 was strapped to the outside of my pack but unreachable unless I took the pack off. I was too tired to do that, I had to stagger on to get to South Harting to eat and get to the B&B where I was staying the night. I carried on, the horse behind, the stables fading, the dust stirred. And the camera swaying where it had been strapped an hour ago for good.
In hindsight it’s easy to say I should have, but with no energy, it was too hard. The weight of the camera you see, had worn my neck raw, and so I couldn’t keep it on my neck. My arms were tired and aching too, so to carry it was too much. A lighter camera with quality glass that would also fulfil my ambition for a quieter camera at gigs and get togethers with families and friends. Saving up for a Rangefinder was the solution.
Up until two weeks ago, that rangefinder was to be the R3M. But then something changed…
Continue to Part 2
* : I’m aware that apart from the top flight, not all SLRs show 100% coverage. The best such as the EOS 5D (96%), EOS 3 (97%), EOS-1 series (100%), Nikon F100 (97%) and Nikon F5/6 (100%) show most of what will be captured.
