Re: The Leica as a Teacher
I read this a few days ago, and came to a similar conclusion. As the owner of a Leica IIIC, who's not enamored of it's charms in use, (it's a beautiful jewel like machine, with a very quite shutter squinty view finder and seperate range viewfinder, which makes the arrangement on my Kodak medalist look light years ahead). I'd drag out my MX with 50mm f1.7. However since that's what I shot with for the majority of my photographic life either I learned those lessons or I didn't. Before that there was a 127 Bakelite Kodak Brownie that belonged to my grandmother a couple of different instamatics , the first a 126 the second a 110, and about the time I was 14 or 15 my father gave me his Ansco Speedex 4.5 a very simple 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 folder that took 120 film, and if you guessed the distance correctly took beautiful photographs. In the spirit of using a rangefinder with one lens, I also prefer my Kodak Retina IIIc, it has a nice, thought not perfect, combined rangefinder/viewfinder takes standard 35mm cassettes, is easily pocketable, due to it's lighter weight. Maybe I'd feel better about using a Leica if I had an M2 or M3... By the way the Leica IIIC was virtually free, (it's officially on loan but I doubt the owner will ever ask for it back), as was the Retina, (which was an outright gift). Adam Maas wrote: Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even a cheap M. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: > The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike > suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking > for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged > because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the > negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan > and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. > > Bob > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. Yesterday I took out my CL for the first time in over a year. Just for fun, I played "the exposure game" before I set up the hyperfocus as I usually do for strolling. "Hmmm... Overcast, not too dark, 400ISO (tri-x of course) I'd say f11 at 1/125." Set the exposure, turned on the meter and I was ~bang on~. It felt pretty cool... ;-) cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Some history... my first camera was a Pentax Km, bought in 1976 as replacement for the Spotmatic I wanted - tested one some months before and decided that was the camera I wanted to use, instead of dad's. Before the Km, I used dad's gear often enough: Agfa Karat, Leicas 3f and 3g, with 35 to 135mm lenses, and a Rolleiflex - all with handheld meter or sunny/16 rule. But the Km really changed my style... I became bolder in the framing, since I had almost the same vision of the film. Later added Lx, K2, Ricoh Kr10, P67, Canon F1n, Nikon Fg, Sinar F, Hassel 500c/m, Nikon AW35L, Olympus Trip35, Olympus Pen, Pentax Zx5, Olympus Trip35, Mx, Mx, Pz1p, Eos 500n... of course selling many of them somewhere in the timeline. Lots of fun... :-) LF Joseph McAllister escreveu: On May 31, 2009, at 10:04 , Adam Maas wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for it too. William Robb My first camera was a Kodak Pocket Instamatic 130, still have it. In between that and the EM I had a Ricoh 35S fixed-focus 35mm P&S. Neither were terribly good, both were lots of fun. Ok. I'll play. My first camera was a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye Flash Model I got for Christmas in 1950, a moulded phenolic box with a plastic lens that sits on my fridge loaded with 620 film on it's 12th frame, flash attached, bulb inserted, safety cover on the flash. I now consider it a toy. There were millions made, including a French version made in France. Value = $5 ±. My second camera was a Zeiss Ikon Nettax 513/16 my father brought me from Germany in 1954. 6x6 folder, 120 film, tan leatherette (not the usual black) which I used for 10 years until I purchased a Zenza Bronica outfit (body, two backs, 3 lenses) in Japan while in the Navy in 1965. Sold the Zeiss for $25 to a mate. It's now worth between $300 and $500. Supplemented the Bronica with a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Bush Pressman in 1966, which I still have. Sold the Bronica stuff at a camera swap meet in 1994 for about $100. About what it was worth. When I got back from my Vietnam tour in 1966 I purchased a Honeywell Pentax Spotmatic, black, which sits in the drawer next to me, loaded with film and a 50mm ƒ1.4 lens. At one point I had more than 17 Takumars, but I sold them all on eBay in the late 90s after deciding I'd be happier with the K-1000 I picked up in 1978. This was followed over the years by another K-1000 or two. Then an MV, MX, LX, a PZ-1p, 2 more LXn, a Deardorff, an *istD, K100, K10D, K20D, another K20D, and you know where this is headed... After getting paid in camera equipment for work breaking up and selling off the contents of a long established camera store in 1996, my house is still filled with a huge variety of cameras and lenses of various sizes and age. If I stop participating in PDML for a few months, it's because I finally decided to get rid of them all, as they are an Albatross around my neck by this time. Joseph McAllister Lots of gear, not much time http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Luiz Felipe luiz.felipe at techmit.com.br http://techmit.com.br/luizfelipe/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Sorry if that's already posted - still catching up with the messages - but make mine Mx and M lenses. The Leica may be a masterpiece of engeneering from the past - dad owns two and I used both when young - but nothing beats framing what the film will see later, meaning SLR. If the manual-only Mx looks too simple or too expensive, the Me Super and company would fit perfectly, as long as used in manual mode... and the user manages to preview the DOF, even by slightly un-winding the lens until it closes the blades. LF Adam Maas escreveu: Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even a cheap M. -- Luiz Felipe luiz.felipe at techmit.com.br http://techmit.com.br/luizfelipe/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On 5/31/09, William Robb wrote: > My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. > It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. > Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one > lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer > for it too. I never had my own camera as a child, but I had access to whatever my mom happened to be carrying around. At 9 or 10 the Kodak disc camera went with me on school field trips. I never liked her 110 cameras. Dad wouldn't let me have the K1000 - "too complicated, you might break it". Ha! But it's mine now, Dad! This just brought back something I thought I'd forgotten. Mom would always find somewhere dark to change film, even if it was 110 or disc. We spent a lot of time on tour buses in Europe and she'd go to the restroom to swap film. I've never asked her why, but I'm going to. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: > ... now that I take this shit too > seriously I don't much care for my pictures. Mark! -- Sandy Harris, Quanzhou, Fujian, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On 5/30/09, David Mann wrote: > On May 31, 2009, at 5:16 AM, Bob W wrote: > > > > Not in this country. I could get extremely very drunk several times over > for > > the price of a Nikon F. > > > > I could get extremely drunk several times over for the price of a > secondhand 50mm f/2. With dents. And fungus. Most of us could, but some of us have standards. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On 5/30/09, Adam Maas wrote: > Anybody else read > > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > a cheap M. Mike suggested something similar back when he was writing the Sunday Morning Photographer. It wasn't Leica-specific, but it was "get a manual camera and a prime lens, pick a film, and shoot a roll a week for a certain amount of time." I did that for a few weeks with the K1000 and an M28/3.5 and that Agfa 400 color film that used to come in the funky 8 packs. Then I started shooting several rolls per week. And it lasted about 5 or 6 months. I don't know if it made my pictures any better, but I sure liked them more. I guess I need to do it again, because now that I take this shit too seriously I don't much care for my pictures. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
Bob W wrote: > > Paul Stenquist wrote: > > > > > I've found that a small smear of cow dung applied to the > > back of the SD > > > card mimics the smell of film. > > > Paul > > > > Your pictures are _that_ bad? > > > > He probably enjoys andouillette too. That's just tripe. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
> Paul Stenquist wrote: > > > I've found that a small smear of cow dung applied to the > back of the SD > > card mimics the smell of film. > > Paul > > Your pictures are _that_ bad? > He probably enjoys andouillette too. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Doug Brewer wrote: One of the few things I miss about film is the scent of a new roll. Smells like possibility. Mark! and it _is_ a great loss. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Paul Stenquist wrote: I've found that a small smear of cow dung applied to the back of the SD card mimics the smell of film. Paul Your pictures are _that_ bad? On Jun 1, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Doug Brewer wrote: mike wilson wrote: Rob Studdert wrote: film loading Film loading. Mmm I wish someone would make an SD card that smelled like Kodachrome. I'd buy that. One of the few things I miss about film is the scent of a new roll. Smells like possibility. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.48/2148 - Release Date: 06/01/09 06:09:00 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
I've found that a small smear of cow dung applied to the back of the SD card mimics the smell of film. Paul On Jun 1, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Doug Brewer wrote: mike wilson wrote: Rob Studdert wrote: film loading Film loading. Mmm I wish someone would make an SD card that smelled like Kodachrome. I'd buy that. One of the few things I miss about film is the scent of a new roll. Smells like possibility. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
mike wilson wrote: Rob Studdert wrote: film loading Film loading. Mmm I wish someone would make an SD card that smelled like Kodachrome. I'd buy that. One of the few things I miss about film is the scent of a new roll. Smells like possibility. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
My first camera was a Voigtlander Vito CD, fixed 50mm lens, with built-in selenium meter and rangefinder. Fine camera, solidly built and with a decent but not exceptional lens. Used that exclusively for about a year, then was introduced to the wonders of SLR photography by a Spotmatic user, so got an SV. For the first five years of my photographic life I never had more than one lens, plus a TC for the SV, and I used B&W film far more than colour. Great training, but I am not sure now that I could assess a scene as well as I did then - one gets out of practice after using modern "wunderkameras" (thanks Adam for that!) for so long. I still do take an SV with a prime lens, a Russian rangefinder, or a Rolleicord, for a walk now and then, just to keep my hand in. John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Monday, 1 June 2009 1:58 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for it too. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On May 31, 2009, at 10:04 , Adam Maas wrote: On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for it too. William Robb My first camera was a Kodak Pocket Instamatic 130, still have it. In between that and the EM I had a Ricoh 35S fixed-focus 35mm P&S. Neither were terribly good, both were lots of fun. Ok. I'll play. My first camera was a Kodak Brownie Hawkeye Flash Model I got for Christmas in 1950, a moulded phenolic box with a plastic lens that sits on my fridge loaded with 620 film on it's 12th frame, flash attached, bulb inserted, safety cover on the flash. I now consider it a toy. There were millions made, including a French version made in France. Value = $5 ±. My second camera was a Zeiss Ikon Nettax 513/16 my father brought me from Germany in 1954. 6x6 folder, 120 film, tan leatherette (not the usual black) which I used for 10 years until I purchased a Zenza Bronica outfit (body, two backs, 3 lenses) in Japan while in the Navy in 1965. Sold the Zeiss for $25 to a mate. It's now worth between $300 and $500. Supplemented the Bronica with a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Bush Pressman in 1966, which I still have. Sold the Bronica stuff at a camera swap meet in 1994 for about $100. About what it was worth. When I got back from my Vietnam tour in 1966 I purchased a Honeywell Pentax Spotmatic, black, which sits in the drawer next to me, loaded with film and a 50mm ƒ1.4 lens. At one point I had more than 17 Takumars, but I sold them all on eBay in the late 90s after deciding I'd be happier with the K-1000 I picked up in 1978. This was followed over the years by another K-1000 or two. Then an MV, MX, LX, a PZ-1p, 2 more LXn, a Deardorff, an *istD, K100, K10D, K20D, another K20D, and you know where this is headed... After getting paid in camera equipment for work breaking up and selling off the contents of a long established camera store in 1996, my house is still filled with a huge variety of cameras and lenses of various sizes and age. If I stop participating in PDML for a few months, it's because I finally decided to get rid of them all, as they are an Albatross around my neck by this time. Joseph McAllister Lots of gear, not much time http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
I bought a small plastic box camera at Cash Erler's Cameras in 1958 for $2. It used 610 film. I was ten years old. I still have some BW prints from that camera around here somewhere. I think I posted one a couple of years ago. My parents bought me a Kodak something or other (Starmatic maybe?) that took 127 film a couple of years later. I developed a few rolls of BW myself and made small contact prints. I have scans of a couple of those as well. Paul On May 31, 2009, at 2:04 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher My first camera was a Kodak Pocket Instamatic 130, still have it. In between that and the EM I had a Ricoh 35S fixed-focus 35mm P&S. Neither were terribly good, both were lots of fun. The Fuji that I have is surprisingly good. It has a full range of aperture and shutter controls, a very decent rangefinder with focusing and a really very good 4.5cm f/2.8 lens. I used it for the first couple of years after I took up photography. My dad bouth a Spotmatic II in around 1972 or so, and I started sneaking it out of his case and using it after he'd had it for 6 months or so. After a while he just told me that he wanted it for his summer vacations and that I could use it the rest of the time. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
- Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher My first camera was a Kodak Pocket Instamatic 130, still have it. In between that and the EM I had a Ricoh 35S fixed-focus 35mm P&S. Neither were terribly good, both were lots of fun. The Fuji that I have is surprisingly good. It has a full range of aperture and shutter controls, a very decent rangefinder with focusing and a really very good 4.5cm f/2.8 lens. I used it for the first couple of years after I took up photography. My dad bouth a Spotmatic II in around 1972 or so, and I started sneaking it out of his case and using it after he'd had it for 6 months or so. After a while he just told me that he wanted it for his summer vacations and that I could use it the rest of the time. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" > Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher > > > Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with > that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon > wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. > > My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. > It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. > Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens > philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for > it too. > > William Robb > My first camera was a Kodak Pocket Instamatic 130, still have it. In between that and the EM I had a Ricoh 35S fixed-focus 35mm P&S. Neither were terribly good, both were lots of fun. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for it too. I used to know someone who bought a new camera about every two years. Camera and kit lens. He bought a mid range film Pentax at one point. He _never_ changed lenses as he didn't "feel safe" doing it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
- Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. My first camera was a Fujica 35-ML rangefinder, and I still have it. It's a little gem of a camera dating from the mid 1950s. Since it is a non interchangable lens camera, I was forced into the one lens philosophy of learning composition. I think I am a better photographer for it too. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Rob Studdert wrote: film loading Film loading. Mmm I wish someone would make an SD card that smelled like Kodachrome. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Nikon EM and a 50/1.8 Series E was my first real camera. Shot with that for a couple of years until my dad loaned me his Nikon wunderkamera that he couldn't figure out. -Adam On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 3:04 AM, John Francis wrote: > > Heck, most of those that are old enough started out with just one > lens, one camera body, and only shooting black and white! But we > couldn't afford to shoot anything near one roll of film a week. > > In my case it was a Brownie 127 for the first six years (during > which time I shot precisely one roll of colour film, and stuck > my dad for the processing costs). Then I graduated to my first > 35mm camera, which I used for almost ten years. Both of these > were all-manual cameras, of course; the Brownie was practically > a point-and-shoot (although I believe it did have some minimal > aperture control - perhaps "sunny" and "shade" settings), and > while the 35mm did have a built-in exposure meter it was still > up to the photographer to transfer the settings to the camera. > Even my first SLR - a Spotmatic II - required that, although > in that case it was made easier by the match-needle readout in > the camera viewfinder. > > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:30:12PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:41:01AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: >> > Anybody else read >> > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >> > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. >> > >> > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with >> > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n >> > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 >> > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even >> > a cheap M. >> >> Not very far from my life between the ages of 13 and 18, though when >> mom rented out the downstairs apartment, I lot my darkroom and didn't >> shoot nearly as much. >> >> Mind you I'd split between plus-X and Pan-F film, and I did have a 2x >> TC for my SRT-101, but one camera, one lens was pretty much how I shot >> for years. >> >> Occasionally I'd borrow Dad's spotmatic and Series-1 70-210, but it >> was almost exclusively the SRT-101 and 58/1.4. >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > M. Adam Maas >> > http://www.mawz.ca >> > Explorations of the City Around Us. >> > >> > -- >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> > PDML@pdml.net >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> > follow the directions. >> >> -- >> The fastest way to get your question answered on the net is to post >> the wrong answer. >> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com >> http://www.red4est.com/lrc >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Heck, most of those that are old enough started out with just one lens, one camera body, and only shooting black and white! But we couldn't afford to shoot anything near one roll of film a week. In my case it was a Brownie 127 for the first six years (during which time I shot precisely one roll of colour film, and stuck my dad for the processing costs). Then I graduated to my first 35mm camera, which I used for almost ten years. Both of these were all-manual cameras, of course; the Brownie was practically a point-and-shoot (although I believe it did have some minimal aperture control - perhaps "sunny" and "shade" settings), and while the 35mm did have a built-in exposure meter it was still up to the photographer to transfer the settings to the camera. Even my first SLR - a Spotmatic II - required that, although in that case it was made easier by the match-needle readout in the camera viewfinder. On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:30:12PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:41:01AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > > Anybody else read > > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > > a cheap M. > > Not very far from my life between the ages of 13 and 18, though when > mom rented out the downstairs apartment, I lot my darkroom and didn't > shoot nearly as much. > > Mind you I'd split between plus-X and Pan-F film, and I did have a 2x > TC for my SRT-101, but one camera, one lens was pretty much how I shot > for years. > > Occasionally I'd borrow Dad's spotmatic and Series-1 70-210, but it > was almost exclusively the SRT-101 and 58/1.4. > > > > > > -- > > M. Adam Maas > > http://www.mawz.ca > > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > > follow the directions. > > -- > The fastest way to get your question answered on the net is to post > the wrong answer. > Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:41:01AM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: > Anybody else read > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > a cheap M. Not very far from my life between the ages of 13 and 18, though when mom rented out the downstairs apartment, I lot my darkroom and didn't shoot nearly as much. Mind you I'd split between plus-X and Pan-F film, and I did have a 2x TC for my SRT-101, but one camera, one lens was pretty much how I shot for years. Occasionally I'd borrow Dad's spotmatic and Series-1 70-210, but it was almost exclusively the SRT-101 and 58/1.4. > > -- > M. Adam Maas > http://www.mawz.ca > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- The fastest way to get your question answered on the net is to post the wrong answer. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 5/31/09, Adam Maas wrote: > >> I'm not much of a fan of the Magic Needle system on the Pentax K mount >> bodies. Best film loading I've seen in a manual-advance SLR is the >> Canon QL system, after that I prefer the traditional system used by >> most other setups (including the Bessa Rangefinders). The system used >> by the M4 and later is adequate but inferior to the basic advance >> system used by most SLRs. > > I'm interested to find out why you consider the film loading system on > the M4 and later inferior to most SLRs? All that's required to load > later M film cameras is to pullout the film leader, place the > cartridge in the camera with the film leader though the tangs, fit the > base and stroke the film advance. I've had more problems with supposed > self loading SLRs personally. > > -- > Rob Studdert It's basicly a 3-handed design. One for the camera, one for the film, one for the bottom plate, the SLR systems only require 2 since the backs don't seperate. Also it requires more care in loading the film into the body since you have smaller gaps to slide the leader through. It's not so much a bad design as it has been bettered. The best variation on traditional loading systems is the SLR-type loading with metal take-up spools that allow you to quickly stick the leader right through the spool like a Leica take-up spool, rather than only inserting the tip into the plastic spool. My F2 has the former system and it's harder to have a takeup failure with that setup than the plastic spool systems which can lose the leader easier. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On 5/31/09, Adam Maas wrote: > I'm not much of a fan of the Magic Needle system on the Pentax K mount > bodies. Best film loading I've seen in a manual-advance SLR is the > Canon QL system, after that I prefer the traditional system used by > most other setups (including the Bessa Rangefinders). The system used > by the M4 and later is adequate but inferior to the basic advance > system used by most SLRs. I'm interested to find out why you consider the film loading system on the M4 and later inferior to most SLRs? All that's required to load later M film cameras is to pullout the film leader, place the cartridge in the camera with the film leader though the tangs, fit the base and stroke the film advance. I've had more problems with supposed self loading SLRs personally. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC +10 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 5/31/09, Adam Maas wrote: > >> A good idea, but the bodies cost roughly the same as an M3 or M4-2 in >> user condition. Of course they do include such niceties as a sane film >> loading design. The lenses are more interesting. However I'm only >> considering bodies I already own. > > M4 and onwards employ the same film loading mechanism which once > mastered is fast to load and very reliable, more so than any Pentax > SLR I've used. Also speaking from a little experience, I've bought, > used and sold 5 Leica M bodies and each have returned more money than > I paid initially including all ancillary costs. I still have an M4 > body which I won't make money on as I had it restored by the factory > (plus I'll never sell it). > > -- > Rob Studdert I'm not much of a fan of the Magic Needle system on the Pentax K mount bodies. Best film loading I've seen in a manual-advance SLR is the Canon QL system, after that I prefer the traditional system used by most other setups (including the Bessa Rangefinders). The system used by the M4 and later is adequate but inferior to the basic advance system used by most SLRs. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On May 31, 2009, at 5:16 AM, Bob W wrote: Not in this country. I could get extremely very drunk several times over for the price of a Nikon F. I could get extremely drunk several times over for the price of a secondhand 50mm f/2. With dents. And fungus. Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On May 31, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +6... UTC +10 Interesting phone number, how does one dial an ellipsis? Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On 5/31/09, Adam Maas wrote: > A good idea, but the bodies cost roughly the same as an M3 or M4-2 in > user condition. Of course they do include such niceties as a sane film > loading design. The lenses are more interesting. However I'm only > considering bodies I already own. M4 and onwards employ the same film loading mechanism which once mastered is fast to load and very reliable, more so than any Pentax SLR I've used. Also speaking from a little experience, I've bought, used and sold 5 Leica M bodies and each have returned more money than I paid initially including all ancillary costs. I still have an M4 body which I won't make money on as I had it restored by the factory (plus I'll never sell it). -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +6... UTC +10 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Sandy Harris wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >> Anybody else read >> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. >> >> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with >> a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n >> and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 >> in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even >> a cheap M. > > Also consider the Cosina/Voigtlander cameras, new rangefinders > with Leica mount. > http://www.cameraquest.com/ > > > -- > Sandy Harris, > Quanzhou, Fujian, China > A good idea, but the bodies cost roughly the same as an M3 or M4-2 in user condition. Of course they do include such niceties as a sane film loading design. The lenses are more interesting. However I'm only considering bodies I already own. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Bob W wrote: > >> >> I wasn't aware that the VAT was lower on used items or calculated on >> margin instead of selling price. > > The VAT rate is the same. The effect is a lower rate if calculated on margin rather than selling price. > >> However it simply isn't invisible to >> the buyer since they can still see non-VAT pricing via the net. >> > > Really? On second-hand goods? Where? There may be different rules for > distance trade, but generally if you sell to a non-EU buyer it is the > buyer's responsibility to claim the VAT back - the seller still has to > charge it and pass it on to the government. In the case of second-hand goods > under the margin scheme the seller doesn't know what the VAT will be until > he's actually sold the item. > > It wouldn't make much sense commercially to quote the VAT separately because > a) he might not get the quoted price and b) he's revealing his margin and > giving the buyer a big bargaining chip. > > I think a more likely scenario is that the seller quotes a price without > listing VAT separately then, when the selling price has been agreed he > either deducts the VAT at source or tells the buyer how much to reclaim. > > Bob > Bob, When shopping used, most use either eBay or KEH are a pricing guide. Neither includes VAT in pricing. Though I doubt most are thinking much beyond 'UK pricing is awful' rather than 'the difference is the VAT'. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > Anybody else read > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > a cheap M. Also consider the Cosina/Voigtlander cameras, new rangefinders with Leica mount. http://www.cameraquest.com/ -- Sandy Harris, Quanzhou, Fujian, China -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
> > I wasn't aware that the VAT was lower on used items or calculated on > margin instead of selling price. The VAT rate is the same. > However it simply isn't invisible to > the buyer since they can still see non-VAT pricing via the net. > Really? On second-hand goods? Where? There may be different rules for distance trade, but generally if you sell to a non-EU buyer it is the buyer's responsibility to claim the VAT back - the seller still has to charge it and pass it on to the government. In the case of second-hand goods under the margin scheme the seller doesn't know what the VAT will be until he's actually sold the item. It wouldn't make much sense commercially to quote the VAT separately because a) he might not get the quoted price and b) he's revealing his margin and giving the buyer a big bargaining chip. I think a more likely scenario is that the seller quotes a price without listing VAT separately then, when the selling price has been agreed he either deducts the VAT at source or tells the buyer how much to reclaim. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Bob W wrote: >> > Well, there's obviously a geographical aspect to this >> because I can walk >> > into a shop, buy a Leica or an SLR, and pay no taxes, fees >> or shipping on >> > either, so those aspects are irrelevant. Otherwise I can buy & sell >> > privately, in which case those aspects don't feature at >> all. Buying & then >> > selling high quality old film cameras, whether they are >> SLRs or Leica Ms >> > involve essentially no financial loss, unless you want to >> start artifically >> > introducing shipping stuff for the Leica which may apply to >> your case but >> > certainly not to all. >> >> Do you not pay VAT in the UK? I understand it's generally included in >> the list price unlike sales or VAT taxes in most North American >> jurisdictions which are not included in the list price but it is there >> nonetheless. > > There is a very much smaller amount of VAT on used equipment than on new > equipment. This is not just because used prices are lower, but because the > calculation is different - for used equipment VAT is charged on the seller's > margin, not on the selling price. It applies to everything, not just Leicas, > and is not quoted separately from the price, so it is invisible to the > buyer. The difference in the amount of VAT between a used Leica and, say, a > used MX is trivial. If the government scrapped VAT on used cameras nobody > would notice any difference. I wasn't aware that the VAT was lower on used items or calculated on margin instead of selling price. However it simply isn't invisible to the buyer since they can still see non-VAT pricing via the net. > > However, in my experience most used Leicas are traded privately, in which > case there is no VAT at all. Even if you buy it from a dealer, the chances > are it's a commission sale. I sold my M4-2 through a dealer on a commission > sale. This seems to be how most used high-end stuff goes here, so as a > private seller there was no VAT in the price. I had to pay the dealer's > commission of course, but that was my choice and I could have avoided it. >From what I've seen, most used leica's are sold privately over the internet. > >> And the vast majority of folk cannot buy such gear >> locally, such gear is really only available for local sale in the >> largest of cities in the western world and only widely available in a >> few of those. Private sales are of course another matter but shipping >> is generally a factor there as well since the primary venues for such >> are online fora such as RFF or APUG. Not to mention the fact that >> buying used at a retail location very rarely results in paying >> competitive prices for Leica bodies. >> >> Therefore your objections are almost entirely the exception rather >> than the rule, particular to your location in the London area and a >> few other locations. >> > > The objections stand. If you have to pay shipping etc when you buy the > thing, and the great majority of your market also has to, then the shipping > is part of the price, just as VAT is. If you choose not to recover it that's > your problem. And whether you buy a Leica or an MX you still have to pay for > shipping, probably at the same rate, so where's the Leica tax? > > Bob > For starters, since you're competing against fairly standard pricing (the pricing on Leica bodies is quite static, otherwise recouping purchase price would not be possible) you'll either need to price over the competition to recover shipping costs or eat the costs and thus be out your original shipping costs. Unlike Leica's, old SLR's are widely available as used items in local stores. There's little reason to buy online and pay shipping unless you really are out in the boonies or desire a specific model. And even then shipping is still cheaper since there's no need to buy insurance on an sub-$100 item unlike the Leica and the SLR body will typically be lighter (and thus cheaper to ship). Also the low price of the bodies means that people will generally ship on the cheap. $20 is on the high side for shipping for a manual SLR but very much on the low side for a Leica body or similar high-value camera. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
re: The Leica as a Teacher
From: Adam Maas Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even a cheap M. It's an aesthetic that I work with my digital gear too. I'm using less and less gear as time goes on ... one or two nice prime lenses plus whichever body happens to tickle my fancy on a given day is the bulk of the equipment I'm using of late (although I continue to like to experiment and enjoy the other gear occasionally). I'd rather do it with digital as scanning film is time consuming and lacking in imagination. My recent experiments with the Pen EE and Tix show that there is a charm to film images, but the time consuming nature of the scanning endeavor and the cost of processing make it somewhat less appealing to work with as a learning medium. To me anyway. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
When I started shooting some thirty five years ago, this was about the only way to do it. My first serious camera was similar to a Leica. It as a Nikon SP2 rangefinder with a 35mm lens. Shot with nothing but that for a long time. Then just a few years back, I spent the better part of a year shooting primarily with a Leica iiif RD, a camera just as basic as my old Nikon. Good experiences both. Paul On May 30, 2009, at 10:41 AM, Adam Maas wrote: Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even a cheap M. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
> > Well, there's obviously a geographical aspect to this > because I can walk > > into a shop, buy a Leica or an SLR, and pay no taxes, fees > or shipping on > > either, so those aspects are irrelevant. Otherwise I can buy & sell > > privately, in which case those aspects don't feature at > all. Buying & then > > selling high quality old film cameras, whether they are > SLRs or Leica Ms > > involve essentially no financial loss, unless you want to > start artifically > > introducing shipping stuff for the Leica which may apply to > your case but > > certainly not to all. > > Do you not pay VAT in the UK? I understand it's generally included in > the list price unlike sales or VAT taxes in most North American > jurisdictions which are not included in the list price but it is there > nonetheless. There is a very much smaller amount of VAT on used equipment than on new equipment. This is not just because used prices are lower, but because the calculation is different - for used equipment VAT is charged on the seller's margin, not on the selling price. It applies to everything, not just Leicas, and is not quoted separately from the price, so it is invisible to the buyer. The difference in the amount of VAT between a used Leica and, say, a used MX is trivial. If the government scrapped VAT on used cameras nobody would notice any difference. However, in my experience most used Leicas are traded privately, in which case there is no VAT at all. Even if you buy it from a dealer, the chances are it's a commission sale. I sold my M4-2 through a dealer on a commission sale. This seems to be how most used high-end stuff goes here, so as a private seller there was no VAT in the price. I had to pay the dealer's commission of course, but that was my choice and I could have avoided it. > And the vast majority of folk cannot buy such gear > locally, such gear is really only available for local sale in the > largest of cities in the western world and only widely available in a > few of those. Private sales are of course another matter but shipping > is generally a factor there as well since the primary venues for such > are online fora such as RFF or APUG. Not to mention the fact that > buying used at a retail location very rarely results in paying > competitive prices for Leica bodies. > > Therefore your objections are almost entirely the exception rather > than the rule, particular to your location in the London area and a > few other locations. > The objections stand. If you have to pay shipping etc when you buy the thing, and the great majority of your market also has to, then the shipping is part of the price, just as VAT is. If you choose not to recover it that's your problem. And whether you buy a Leica or an MX you still have to pay for shipping, probably at the same rate, so where's the Leica tax? Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Bob W wrote: >> >> The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital >> expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an M4 >> will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper than >> that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than shipping, >> fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when selling it. > > Well, there's obviously a geographical aspect to this because I can walk > into a shop, buy a Leica or an SLR, and pay no taxes, fees or shipping on > either, so those aspects are irrelevant. Otherwise I can buy & sell > privately, in which case those aspects don't feature at all. Buying & then > selling high quality old film cameras, whether they are SLRs or Leica Ms > involve essentially no financial loss, unless you want to start artifically > introducing shipping stuff for the Leica which may apply to your case but > certainly not to all. Do you not pay VAT in the UK? I understand it's generally included in the list price unlike sales or VAT taxes in most North American jurisdictions which are not included in the list price but it is there nonetheless. And the vast majority of folk cannot buy such gear locally, such gear is really only available for local sale in the largest of cities in the western world and only widely available in a few of those. Private sales are of course another matter but shipping is generally a factor there as well since the primary venues for such are online fora such as RFF or APUG. Not to mention the fact that buying used at a retail location very rarely results in paying competitive prices for Leica bodies. Therefore your objections are almost entirely the exception rather than the rule, particular to your location in the London area and a few other locations. > >> Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total (traded in a FR >> on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). Even a Nikon F >> can be had under $100. >> >> With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro >> bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. >> > > Not in this country. I could get extremely very drunk several times over for > the price of a Nikon F. > > Bob > While F's with eyelevel prisms are rather ridiculously expensive and are among the exceptions I refer to, with Photomic heads they are tend to be very reasonably priced, often under $100 with an FT head, the T and FTn being a little more expensive but can be had in the two digit pricerange with a little care. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Very true, I'd not be shooting film anymore if I didn't enjoy the process nearly as much as the results. Developing and scanning eat up time. The flip side is I enjoy developing and don't mind scanning. -Adam On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:45 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > Its not the cost in dollars that makes using film expensive, > It’s the cost in hours of my time. > > J.C. O'Connell ( mailto:hifis...@gate.net ) > > > -Original Message- > From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of > Adam Maas > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 12:43 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher > > > Depends on the film. 5 rolls a month of inexpensive B&W film (Arista for > example) souped in Rodinal is around $15 a month. > > E-6 is expensive. C-41 less so and B&W can be dirt cheap. > > -Adam > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Luka Knezevic-Strika > wrote: >> 50 dollars or even a hundred is peanuts compared to the cost of film >> and develompent only for shooting 4-5 rolls a month for a year. >> >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >>> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Anybody else read >>>>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph >>>>> er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >>>>> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a >>>>> teacher. >>>>> >>>>> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not >>>>> with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon > >>>>> FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and >>>>> my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction >>>>> fees on even a cheap M. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: >>>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/200 >>>> 9/05/why >>>> -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html >>>> >>>> The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my > >>>> M4-2 which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I >>>> paid for it. Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a >>>> service, but for a 1968 camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the >>>> other hand, is worth nothing now. >>>> >>>> The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the >>>> way Mike suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I >>>> bought by not smoking for a year. I generally shot black & white and > >>>> rarely had anything enlarged because I couldn't afford it - just the > >>>> contact prints. I still have all the negs and contacts and there are > >>>> probably hundreds of photos I should scan and enlarge. But I can't >>>> be arsed. >>>> >>>> Bob >>>> >>> >>> The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital >>> expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an >>> M4 will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper >>> than that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than >>> shipping, fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when >>> selling it. Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total >>> (traded in a FR on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). > >>> Even a Nikon F can be had under $100. >>> >>> With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro >>> bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. >>> >>> -- >>> M. Adam Maas >>> http://www.mawz.ca >>> Explorations of the City Around Us. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >>> and follow the directions. >>> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > >> follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > M. Adam Maas > http://www.mawz.ca > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
> > The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital > expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an M4 > will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper than > that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than shipping, > fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when selling it. Well, there's obviously a geographical aspect to this because I can walk into a shop, buy a Leica or an SLR, and pay no taxes, fees or shipping on either, so those aspects are irrelevant. Otherwise I can buy & sell privately, in which case those aspects don't feature at all. Buying & then selling high quality old film cameras, whether they are SLRs or Leica Ms involve essentially no financial loss, unless you want to start artifically introducing shipping stuff for the Leica which may apply to your case but certainly not to all. > Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total (traded in a FR > on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). Even a Nikon F > can be had under $100. > > With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro > bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. > Not in this country. I could get extremely very drunk several times over for the price of a Nikon F. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
Its not the cost in dollars that makes using film expensive, Its the cost in hours of my time. J.C. O'Connell ( mailto:hifis...@gate.net ) -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 12:43 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The Leica as a Teacher Depends on the film. 5 rolls a month of inexpensive B&W film (Arista for example) souped in Rodinal is around $15 a month. E-6 is expensive. C-41 less so and B&W can be dirt cheap. -Adam On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote: > 50 dollars or even a hundred is peanuts compared to the cost of film > and develompent only for shooting 4-5 rolls a month for a year. > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: >>>> >>>> Anybody else read >>>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph >>>> er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >>>> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a >>>> teacher. >>>> >>>> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not >>>> with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon >>>> FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and >>>> my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction >>>> fees on even a cheap M. >>>> >>> >>> The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: >>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/200 >>> 9/05/why >>> -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html >>> >>> The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my >>> M4-2 which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I >>> paid for it. Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a >>> service, but for a 1968 camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the >>> other hand, is worth nothing now. >>> >>> The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the >>> way Mike suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I >>> bought by not smoking for a year. I generally shot black & white and >>> rarely had anything enlarged because I couldn't afford it - just the >>> contact prints. I still have all the negs and contacts and there are >>> probably hundreds of photos I should scan and enlarge. But I can't >>> be arsed. >>> >>> Bob >>> >> >> The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital >> expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an >> M4 will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper >> than that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than >> shipping, fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when >> selling it. Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total >> (traded in a FR on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). >> Even a Nikon F can be had under $100. >> >> With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro >> bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. >> >> -- >> M. Adam Maas >> http://www.mawz.ca >> Explorations of the City Around Us. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> and follow the directions. >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
Depends on the film. 5 rolls a month of inexpensive B&W film (Arista for example) souped in Rodinal is around $15 a month. E-6 is expensive. C-41 less so and B&W can be dirt cheap. -Adam On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Luka Knezevic-Strika wrote: > 50 dollars or even a hundred is peanuts compared to the cost of film > and develompent only for shooting 4-5 rolls a month for a year. > > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: >>>> >>>> Anybody else read >>>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph >>>> er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >>>> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. >>>> >>>> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with >>>> a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n >>>> and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 >>>> in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even >>>> a cheap M. >>>> >>> >>> The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: >>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/why >>> -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html >>> >>> The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my M4-2 >>> which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I paid for it. >>> Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a service, but for a 1968 >>> camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the other hand, is worth nothing now. >>> >>> The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike >>> suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking >>> for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged >>> because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the >>> negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan >>> and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. >>> >>> Bob >>> >> >> The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital >> expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an M4 >> will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper than >> that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than shipping, >> fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when selling it. >> Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total (traded in a FR >> on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). Even a Nikon F >> can be had under $100. >> >> With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro >> bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. >> >> -- >> M. Adam Maas >> http://www.mawz.ca >> Explorations of the City Around Us. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
- Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" Subject: The Leica as a Teacher Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. How eerie is that. On May 12, 2002, I came up with this little nugget: I believe there is a photographic equivalent of music theory that the student needs to learn, in order to excel at the art and craft of photography. Visual theory at it's most basic is the building blocks of imagery, whether photographic or other. Theory such as how light interacts with shape and form, how perspective changes depending on angle of view. This is best learned with simple tools, anything else complicates the learning process. If one is learning to compose music, one starts with a single instrument, such as a piano. I think it very rare for a student of music composition to start by composing a full orchestral symphony. I played the trumpet when I was younger. A simple instrument, with only 3 keys. In a way, perhaps there is an equivalency here, as a camera only has 3 controls for making pictures, no matter how many buttons, control dials, and inscrutable custom functions they put on the camera to complicate things for us. But, I digress. I never got really good at the trumpet, in my hands the instrument had all the positive attributes of a chainsaw with a burned out governor. I learned enough about music to realize I would never be a Sousa, or an Armstrong. Hell, when I figured out I would never be an Alpert, I gave up the trumpet. I found other fish to fry. I discovered cameras. I also discovered that much of what I learned from music was applicable to photography at one level or another. I may have a tin ear, but I found I have a pretty good eye for pictures. What I learned playing the trumpet, albeit badly, was that there is a need to learn the basics. One needs to learn scales, and finger patterns on the keys to make the notes come out the way they are supposed to. One needs to learn how to blow into the instrument in the right way to make the right noise. One needs to learn that when giving a Christmas concert outdoors when it is -30, the mouthpiece should be kept in an inside pocket to keep it warm between songs. Some lessons are learned harder than others. One needs to have a thick skin to not be overly discouraged by failure, or the embarrassment of having a trumpet stuck to ones face in front of the Prime Minister. But, I digress. In photography, one needs to learn about light and shadow first. One doesn't need a zoom lens for this. Often, the added visual confusion that a zoom can create can interrupt this learning process. I am not saying there is not a place for zoom lenses in photography. The zoom, in the hands of a skilled and visually adept person is a powerful tool. All I am saying is that it is not the tool to learn the very basics of visual theory with. For this, a prime lens, and one that closely matches the human eye's field of vision is preferable. By sticking with a "natural" perspective to start, we can learn more easily how what we see in three dimensions will translate to two, or how what we see in colour will translate to black and white. By learning the fundaments first, with simple tools, I think we will be better visual artists later. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
50 dollars or even a hundred is peanuts compared to the cost of film and develompent only for shooting 4-5 rolls a month for a year. On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: >>> >>> Anybody else read >>> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph >>> er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >>> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. >>> >>> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with >>> a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n >>> and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 >>> in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even >>> a cheap M. >>> >> >> The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: >> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/why >> -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html >> >> The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my M4-2 >> which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I paid for it. >> Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a service, but for a 1968 >> camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the other hand, is worth nothing now. >> >> The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike >> suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking >> for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged >> because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the >> negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan >> and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. >> >> Bob >> > > The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital > expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an M4 > will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper than > that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than shipping, > fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when selling it. > Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total (traded in a FR > on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). Even a Nikon F > can be had under $100. > > With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro > bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. > > -- > M. Adam Maas > http://www.mawz.ca > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Leica as a Teacher
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Bob W wrote: >> >> Anybody else read >> http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph >> er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html >> Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. >> >> I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with >> a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n >> and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 >> in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even >> a cheap M. >> > > The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/why > -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html > > The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my M4-2 > which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I paid for it. > Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a service, but for a 1968 > camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the other hand, is worth nothing now. > > The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike > suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking > for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged > because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the > negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan > and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. > > Bob > The Leica tax is not a myth. Even if you consider the capital expenditures a wash, a comparable 35mm SLR of similar vintage to an M4 will cost no more than $50 and is often available much cheaper than that. In other words buying the SLR will cost you less than shipping, fees and taxes on the Leica, which you won't recover when selling it. Heck, my FX-3 cost me $5 out of pocket and $25 total (traded in a FR on it, payed $20 for the FR, got $20 trade-in value). Even a Nikon F can be had under $100. With very few exceptions, and nearly all of them fully-featured pro bodies, 35mm SLR's are available for the price of beer. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Leica as a Teacher
> > Anybody else read > http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photograph > er/2009/05/a-leica-year.html > Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. > > I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with > a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n > and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 > in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even > a cheap M. > The follow-up piece is quite interesting too: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/why -it-has-to-be-a-leica.html The Leica 'tax' is a myth, as he points out. I have recently sold my M4-2 which I had for about 8-10 years for about the same money I paid for it. Admittedly I spent £150- on it a few years ago for a service, but for a 1968 camera it did pretty well. My E-1, on the other hand, is worth nothing now. The older photographers among us had little choice but to learn the way Mike suggests. My early photography was with an MX which I bought by not smoking for a year. I generally shot black & white and rarely had anything enlarged because I couldn't afford it - just the contact prints. I still have all the negs and contacts and there are probably hundreds of photos I should scan and enlarge. But I can't be arsed. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
The Leica as a Teacher
Anybody else read http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/a-leica-year.html Mike Johnston's little ode to simplicity and the Leica as a teacher. I'm seriously thinking about giving the basic concept a try. Not with a Leica though, but rather with either a Yashica FX-3 or Nikon FM2n and a fast normal. I don't feel like paying the Leica tax and my FX-3 in particular cost less than the eBay/Paypal transaction fees on even a cheap M. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
