Be Honest. What Gear Would You Buy If You Were Starting Over From Scratch and Price Was No Object?

I was thinking about this today as I stood in the middle of Precision Camera and contemplated all of the new camera gear. All of the Leicas and Nikons and Canons. All the smaller cameras and used cameras. The overwhelming wealth of choices that would be available to someone with a totally empty camera bag and a totally limitless bank account.

What would I buy?

I played the game as an enthusiast and artist instead of falling into the tired role of commercial photographer. In this role I would not need an extensive inventory of lenses and accessories. I would not need to impress clients. I would not need fast focus or fast frame rates. As I deleted the preoccupations of my occupation I started to change directions entirely. My needs would be so different.

I wouldn't worry about high flash sync or access to a really cool flash system. I wouldn't need cameras with special modes or bracketing features.

I could sit back and look at the way I shoot for myself and start making some adaptations to help my innate style along. After looking through the exif date of the 140,000+ images I have up on Smugmug.com and the 240,000 images I currently have in Lightroom libraries I can see that, among my personal work, I use four focal lengths almost exclusively. Those are the 50mm, the 85mm, 100mm (+/- 5mm)  and the 135mm. Nothing else comes close. Concerned about wide angles vanishes into the void.

So I would want a system that gives me the focal lengths I cherish. Not a zoom or a range of zooms but real, actual prime focal lengths.

I want a body with a full frame sensor and
a simple menu interface. My choice of lenses also strikes rangefinders from consideration since there are so few great focal lengths I like these days that work well with the available finders from Leica. Gone is the .85X finder that made the 75mm and 90mm lenses workable. Now all that's left is the .72X finder. Ho. Hum.

My first thoughts, if money was no object, were to go with the latest Leica medium format camera and the right assortment of lenses but then I realized that if I didn't have to work for a living I'd spent most of my time walking around with the cameras shooting and I really don't want to carry the weight. I scratched it from my list.

I thought about the Fuji mirrorless system because I heard the lenses were so great but I'm not sure about the X-trans sensors and to be truthful I can't get on well with the interface on most of the cameras they make. Things seem to change uncontrollably. I'm sure I could get used to it but if I was rich and choosy why would I have to submit to the camera's fickle will?

The Olympus cameras and Panasonic cameras are nice but lack gravitas and the full frame sensor I mentioned above.

When I really burrowed down I realized that I liked the feel of some of the Nikon bodies but I'd like to mix and match lenses with other makers. I'd go with the Sigma 50mm Art lens for that focal length, the 80mm Summilux of the old Leica R series for that focal length, the 100mm f2.0 from the Canon for that focal length and the 135mm f2.0 Zeiss lens for that focal lengths. In the end I'd probably settle for one camera and one lens, though.

Yeah. Even though I've scratched it off my list it would be a Leica M in black paint paired with a 50mm Apo Summicron. That would pretty much do it for me.

What would your camera and lens choice be if there were no constraints?

I had a big romance with Leica M cameras in the 1970's, 1980's and 1990's. Maybe it's time for the rapprochement.

Added for all those folks who presumed I have never handled an M Leica:





William Beebe said...

Single body, probably one of the newer Sony APS-C bodies, and one lens, probably the Sigma 30mm. And extra batteries.

Kirk Tuck said...

+1 to the extra batteries. No matter which brand of cameras.

Tom Dills said...

Just did exactly that. Money wasn't quite "no object" but I sold about 20 pounds of full-frame Canon gear and replaced it with a Fuji XT1 and 4 lenses with money left over. No regrets and the IQ is excellent. Even the nanocontrast.

The files are different to process in Lightroom, mostly the sharpening, but are excellent. The menus are just menus and not any harder than any others. And the lenses are yummy...you'd like them.

It does eat batteries.

Anonymous said...

Don't do it Kirk. Too much money and the results just don't justify the expense. Unfortunately digital Leica's are just shadows of their film ancestors.

amolitor said...

I print small. I shoot slowly. So basically anything at all will do. Cameras these days are all so awesome, eh?

So it comes down to the personal. There's family history with Nikons. So it's got to be Nikon. I love this D3100 I've been using for the last 4 years. It's profoundly limited in ways I work around without thinking about any more. It's ridiculously small and light by modern standards.

I wish it coupled with AIS lenses in a useful way? So I guess I'd look at the modern Nikons that couple properly, but I think I might have to go for something that's too big to get that, so it's probably the 3100. Maybe I'd go nuts and buy the 3200.

But it doesn't matter much. Anything currently available would do fine for me. They're all incredible machines.

sbimson said...

If money were no object I'd take a CFV-50c for my Hasselblad 500c/m with a Zeiss 80mm 2.8 and a Fuji X100T for when I wanted something a bit smaller to walk around with.

Michael Ferron said...

Fuji! What's not to like? Best bargain in digital cameras is the XE1 at just under $300 used. Image quality is superb, jpegs are really nice and the retro feel and controls work for me. I do like the interface too!! :0

With latest firmware AF is decent and my glued-on 27 2.8 is superb and makes for a compact package that feels right to me.

Craig Yuill said...

I typically take my time when selecting gear, so I am not sure I would select gear that is much different from what I've currently got. I suppose that I would mostly get updated versions of camera bodies, lenses, and accessories I currently use. What I might do differently is put together a better core group of prime lenses than what I currently have - 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85-135mm (or format equivalent) lenses in f/1.8 or f/1.4 flavors. Perhaps also an exotic super tele in the 300mm f/2.8 to 500mm f/4 range. (Price is no object, right?)

Really, at this time I have no overwhelming desire to change gear or add to my current system. What I have is pretty good. I think what I really need to do is invest time and perhaps a bit of money in learning how to make better pictures and do post processing to get the best final results I can. And of course get out there and shoot, shoot, shoot.

Racecar said...

I've always lusted after the Leica S. Even though it's a somewhat large DSLR, it feels wonderful in the hand (yes I have often tried them on... so to speak.) AND they have such a lovely 37.5MP, 45 x 30mm CCD Sensor. It goes without saying that the lenses are second to none. The price of admission is too dear. Imagine paying about 250.00 USD for on lithium battery. A Canon 5Dsr is more realistic and will have to do until I win the lottery.

Gordon R. Brown said...

Your Leica love permeated your Lisbon novel.

I'd be interested in reading a blog post about your Leica affair.

A Leica user led me astray into the Leica world in 1977. I'm still using lenses he sold me.

Mark Levison said...

Kirk I'm just starting this experiment. Nikon hasn't replaced my D300 and I want smaller, lighter. Cue Olympus EM 5 mk II, two f2.8 zoom lenses and the battery grip. Only thing missing an f1.4 portrait lens. However since this already >4k Canadian I will wait a few years

Markus Spring said...

Full frame would be a big treat, so the Sony A7II and two primes. In reality, the (old) Olympus OM-D MD-5 does well and used camera bodies cost next to nothing meanwhile. IQ? simply good enough up to 17"x22" prints. Weight? Negligible, even with 4 primes and 2 bodies. Handling? Once you know it and have your settings in place, no problem any more.

Anonymous said...

Any with a depth of focus scale.

Anthony Bridges said...

I currently have eight cameras. Four Canon, two Fuji, one Nikon p/s and one Olympus p/s. The camera I have on my shoulder the most is the Fuji X100s. This camera is great. I'm one of those goofs who almost always walk out the door with a camera on their shoulder. I don't feel like I'm lacking anything with the X100s.

The idea of the Sony RX1 sounds good. Compact full frame and really nice lens. But the lack of a built-in viewfinder scratched that from my list.

Anonymous said...

Interesting thing to muse on.
While I'd like to have a play with medium format digital, if money was no object (and for similar amount as mf digital) I could build a small dedicated studio space out back. Does studio space count as kit?

For the work I do, my existing cameras (olympus ep5 and bronica Sq) cover all I need and indeed want. A permanent workspace on the other hand would be lovely.


Hugh said...

I recently got rid of everything except a 5D3 body, 35/1.4L, 85/1.2L and 135/2.0L lenses.
Feels much better having no decisions to make.

If money was no object, I'd buy the same again, and add the 5DSR, but I'd still only carry one body.

Got rid of the 24mm TS-E II, even though it was a brilliant lens. Too heavy, too delicate.
For the few times I need a wider lens than 25mm, I can just stitch together a multi-shot panorama.

Larry Cordeiro said...

Ha, sorry Leica another vote for Fuji. When I bought my X-E1 it had the right feel, and balance for me when used with the kit (18-55mm) lens. I did add an accessory grip for better balance when I added the Fuji (55-200mm) tele, but best of all I am able to use some of my old Rokkor lenses (with adaptor) on the X-E1. I'm so familiar with the feel, and sweet spots on my old Rokkor's it makes photography (for me) fun again. I guess I will eventually buy a X-T1, or maybe the full-fram Fuji when it materializes?

Don Parsons said...

I have 4 systems, well parts of systems, that I use for different things. I don't shoot professionally any longer and keep the cameras around that feel good to use. I get to use them when I feel like it, so I use what I like, what has worked in the past.

My Nikon system has 5 lenses built around a FE body: a Tokina 17mm, nikkor 28mm, 35 f2.8, a 50, a 55 micro and a 105. When I shoot film, this is my go-to bag.

Then I have a Canon film with an elan 7e which transitions to digital with a 60D. The digital is my airshow setup or when I'm shooting seriously. I have a couple image-stabilized lenses which are killer for air-to-air shots.

The last one is m43, an Olympus EM5 with 2 of the kit zooms and the 17 1.8. I need to add the 45 and then I'll be set, for a while. This is my travel light or walkabout system.

I used to want a Leica, not so much any more with the Olympus. I can buy a lot of batteries for the price of a Leica.

I used to want a Hasselblad-not any more. I dallied with getting a Pentaz67 but the size pretty much said no.

Thanks for waking up my interest early this morning Kirk, I think I'll go out shooting...

sixblockseast said...

I'm close to starting from scratch. Only have the Ricoh GR right now and waiting to buy a new CSC. Leaning towards the Olympus EM-10 II but if money no object and the EM- II is a big improvement then maybe the latter?

Dave said...

I'd keep the RX100 IV but have to debate between what my pixelitis (OCD) brain wants, the Sony A7R II or give in to my sentimental, practical side and the OMD5 II and all those wonderful lenses. M43 has the glass! The 12mm, 17mm, 25mm, 75mm and that high res mode for landscapes & still life.

Ok that settles it. Rx100 IV and the OMD if my CFO says I can go whole hog on the glass.

DSLR's are dead to me unless I pick up a used D700 just for farts and giggles.

Max Rottersman said...

I'm happy with my current setup. Ricoh GR, Sony A6000/10-18 f4, Sony A7 with 55mm FE and 100mm Topco, Sigma DP1M. Been playing with the Panasonic LX100. If money were no object I'd buy a Lieca M with a Leica 16-18-21mm f/4.0 M-Tri-Elmar. I'd buy some of the SLR Hyperprimes. I'd buy a Nikon D810. I'd put in an order for the new Blackmagic Mini-URSA and some lenses to go with them. I'd buy a huge Epson printer. I'd buy a Sigma DP3M, maybe the Quattro version too.

Jim said...

I'd be buying a Panasonic GX8 and assorted lenses. I've reached the point where I don't want to drag around my heavy DSLR (Canon 7D) and Bogen 3221W. I've already bought a 3 Legged Thing for hiking. That alone dropped my kit weight by around 7 pounds.

Peter Wright said...

Although I've been through the cycle of owing/using just about everything, ironically, I find that I get my best pictures when using my Leica film camera and one lens (usually 35mm). That's all I need to carry to be assured of a productive outing. In some ways this is a bit disappointing as I like gear! The downside comes from having to pay for and then develop and scan my films – about one hour for each film. So if cost was no object, I would keep using film, but have someone else do all my developing and scanning. The alternate (cost and time matters) is a Leica Monochrome.

Anonymous said...


Hmmm. Hasselblad 500c/m a few prime lenses and a high end film scanner.
And oh yes, a freezer full of tri-x.
Full frame sensor, very simple menu's (whats for lunch) and prime lenses
whats not to like?


Anonymous said...

iPhone 6s+. I like the =28mm FF focal length. The IQ is more than good enough. And most important of all it doesn't scream photo enthusiast!!

Also a pocket is a great replacement for a camera bag.

Anonymous said...

What would be nice is a 2 1/4 square digital twin-lens reflex Rolleiflex with 75 or 80mm lens.

Henk said...

I'd buy a medium format camera like a PhaseOne or Leica with three lenses, a very sturdy tripod and would hire an assistant to carry it.


Peter Wright said...

One other point: You say that you are put off by the 0.72 finder of new Leica's as they don't suit the longer focal lengths you prefer. But you do know I hope, that you can buy a tiny screw-in lens for the eyepiece that converts it up by a factor of 1.25 or 1.4? When I use my 90mm Elmarit at wide apertures or close distances (something I hear they do often in portrait-land) I just screw in the eyepiece adaptor and I'm good to go. Even leaves the hot shoe free for a pocket wizard. This works for both film and digital Leica's.

The digital Leica's also have live view now (although it is not as good as you have on your OMDs – just better than you have on your D810!). This means you can now (with a Novoflex adaptor and suitable lens) do tripod mount macro photography or product work. What's not to like!


Kirk in PDX said...

I go through this mental exercise every once in a while, and always land back on what I already have; OM-D E-M5II with the PL 25mm f/1.4 pretty much glued to the front. Super form factor, effective IBIS, blown highlight warning in the EVF, great size for both body and lenses, plenty of resolution and I prefer the depth of field being a little more generous while having no trouble getting it thin if that is the look I want. I have a handful of other lenses, but rarely use them: 12-40mm f/2.8 is my hiking/rain/landscape lens; 75mm f/1.8 my thin DOF lens, also great for candid portraiture; Oly 45mm f/1.8 only because I had it before the others. The 35-100mm f/2.8 is on the short list for next up. I can shoot all of these lenses wide open and be happy with the results (ok, the 45mm benefits from being stopped down to f/2.2 and 25mm to f/2.0).

The Sony A7 series is pretty interesting now that it is in its second generation, but even if money was not a factor, size still is and the lenses are bigger than I'd want, and the resolution really is more than I need.

The Fuji XT-1 looks interesting as well, but I really like IBIS and live blown highlight warnings.

Anonymous said...

If you are going to mix and match lenses you will mostly be shooting manual w/ aperature on lens. One dial for shutter speed and another for iso is all you need most of the time. A great viewfinder, focus aids, zebras, etc. that show you what you are about to capture, and minimal shutter lag, are much more important than the menu system. High iso and stabilization are important to expand the conditions under which a quality image can be captured.

Try putting the contax G 45 and 90 on an a7rii - great images under an incredible range of conditions - but only if you can take your time and shoot for pleasure. The lenses are so cheap vs. 'modern equivalents' they offset about half the cost of the camera. A pro needs to work at a pace that justifies auto-everything and menus that can quickly alter 'auto' parameters, but for pure pleasure an all manual shooter only needs a couple dials and tools that help see and capture the image.

Brian Keairns said...

If money was no object I'd have a Domke bag with 4 MFT camera bodies and the Panasonic Leica MFT range. I'd also have the Panasonic ultra wide zoom.

This kit would provide my ideal combination of portability, DOF control, focal range, color consistency and image quality.

GM5 with Summilux 15mm 1.7
GX8 with Summilux 25mm 1.4
GX8 with Nocticron 42.5mm 1.2

GM5 with Panasonic 7-14mm 4.0

Peter Wright said...

Almost forgot to comment on the lovely picture at the top of this post. I really like it. From the grain, it must have been taken on 35mm film (say Agfa and developed in Rodinal) using a Leica (say M4, given the period that it appears to be (say 1975)). I would also think you used a 50mm summicron set to about f8 and 1/125 given perspective and the overcast day. Probably taken in Paris after a rain shower, given the architecture. So how close did I get?

Joseph Kashi said...

If money was no object, then two systems to be used as a particular need might dictate, probably a Pentax 645Z with its best available lenses as the "serious" camera and an Olympus E-M5 II with the 12-40mm PRO zoom, and a range of Olympus and Panasonic primes for daily use.

There are so many sharp, light M43 primes that there's a wealth of good choices in all price ranges. As an example, for someone going as light as possible, Panasonic's 35-100 f/4 zoom is quite sharp for such a small, light lens when closed down by one stop. The M43 cameras tend to be my daily choice despite owning some larger, higher resolution systems.

John F. Opie said...

Olympus EM1 with 7-14, 12-40 and 40-150...and the 300 when it's out. I still have a 600 Vivitar Series1 Solid CAT for real reach. Add an EM5.2 body. Perfect for me. Fits into a tiny case, doesn't break the back or the budget...yep. :-)

James Pilcher said...

One camera, one lens: Sony A7R II with Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2. For you, Kirk, substitute the Loxia 50mm f/2. The EVF is indispensable for me, even beyond the lens choices.

Carlo Santin said...

Well this is fun. I think I already own the gear I would want, I just need to cure myself of GAS. I still love and use 35mm film, so a Nikon F6 with a 50mm 1.8. I already have the 50, and I use an F100. I often go out with just this combination and I rarely find myself wanting a longer or wider lens. Never been disappointed with the results. But since money is no object throw in the 100mm and 180 mm primes. Maybe a wide angle just in case the mood hits me but it's not a necessity. A 35mm too just because.

Then give me a nice 6x9 format camera like the Fuji GW690 series, the Texas Leica.

I already have and use a Yashica 24 TLR. I love squares and it's wonderful not being dependent on a battery. So maybe I'd buy another one as a backup.

Maybe I would buy the Nikon DF, a smaller FF digital body that I could use with my Nikon lenses for those times when I would want to shoot digital. I enjoy digital for the convenience and the variable ISO, but that's where my interest in digital ends, I don't find digital cameras engaging or stimulating at all, and that part of photography is essential for me. Guitar players will understand this analogy (I play guitar too): the feel of the instrument in your hands is really what it's all about. A guitar has to feel right or you just won't play to your full potential, you won't be enjoying yourself.

Would I buy a Leica M3? I've always been curious about Leicas, so if money is no object, then why not? Only with a 50mm lens though.

Then a nice printer and a scanner and I'm done.

Patrick Dodds said...

I'd swap all my cameras except one in exchange for more courage.

Mark Bellringer said...

If it was just one camera and one lens... I love the Sony A7S and a 35mm lens - I have the Sony which is a great size and weight but I'd like the Zeiss Loxia 35mm F2

Kirk Tuck said...

Peter Wright, you nailed everything but the year and the camera model. It was done in 1978 and it was shot with a Leica M3 single stroke. Yes on the Rodinal.

Omer said...

I'm fairly content with my Nikon stuff but since we're daydreaming here, a digital Leica M with the new 28mm f1.4 'lux.

bpr said...

I'd grab a Sony A7r II, with the Zony 55, Zeiss 25/2, 85/1.8. I'd add a Metabones for my "Legacy" Canon EF glass plus a kit of C/Y fit Zeiss lenses for adapting and with a Contax 159MM just for the odd time when I need reminding why I don't shoot film any more.

This is really just a slight update of my current set up where I have the A7r 'classic' with the 35 & 55 Sony Zeiss lenses and a Contax G90/2.8 (nice lens and AF's on the Sonys with a Deo-Tech adapted) and no AF wide - but the Batis 25 is in my sights.

The old C/Y glass is, also in some respects fantastic. The 18/4, 25/2.8, 28/2.8, 85/1.4 & 28-85 zoom all have that something extra which makes me want to shoot them on the Sony sensor - in spite of the occasional miss with focus and tendency to mushy corners on the wides.

Mister Ian said...

I sold all my Nikon stuff and bought a Sony RX10 II. No more sensor dust or lost images having the wide angle lens on when I need the telephoto.

Bassman said...

Pretty much did this over the last two years or so. Put the Nikon kit on the shelf and moved to m43.

Cameras: E-M1 and GX7. Both subject to updating if and when something "better enough" shows up.
Primes: 17/1.8, 25/1.4, 45/1.8. Keep thinking about one of the 60s.
Zooms: 9-18, the Panasonic 2.8s: 12-35 and 35-100, 43 50-200/2.8-3.5 for grandkids sports and shows. Rarely use the 14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses, but they're too inexpensive to bother selling.

Charles David Gryder said...

I had the same love affair with Leicas as you in the 60's through 80's - that's when Leica made real cameras and not just photographic jewelry. Now Leica owners are all 1 lens purchase away from a divorce. Get over it. If you must, get an old M2 or M3 and put it on a shelf - take it down occasionally and pet it when you need a Leica "fix".

If I were you, I'd grab an old Nikkor 50mm-135mm f/3.5 AI-S - same vintage as your 25-50mm f/4....built like a tank and super sharp. Slap it on your D750 or 810 and it'll never come off.

As for me?...I'm perfectly happy with EM5 and a few tiny prime lenses - camera focuses better than I ever could and image stabilizer borders on supernatural.

Kirk Tuck said...

Why oh why do readers assume that I've never owned or don't already own Leica M series cameras and that my nostalgia is for something I have no experience with? Here's the definitive article I wrote about a decade or more of my use of the M cameras: http://photo.net/equipment/leica/m6

At latest count I have owned 18 different Leica M and R bodies with many, many lenses. "Get over it."? I don't think so.

TMJ said...

Leica M-Monochrom with the 50mm Summilux Aspheric lens.

Paul Hodgson said...

Money no object? Well I only shoot stills and love the idea of full frame and smaller bodies. I'm pretty much sorted with two lenses, a 50 prime and my 105 macro occasionally my 85. So, probs the new mega pixel Sony A7 ii with those primes stuffed into a nice small bag. Oh yeah, plenty of batteries too.

ODL Designs said...

My m43rds kit is pretty perfect for almost every thing I do. But if money were no object, and these days we can get into most formats for much less than the last decade.... It would be a medium format with a 90mm lens... Or a Sony a7r2 to use my OM lenses for fun.

Aside from that, gear lust has all but dried up. Well, until Olympus releases a17mm f1 :)

Anonymous said...

Guess it all boils down to what works for you, function, ergonomics and IQ. I have the M and 50 APO you mentioned, so maybe I should be there. I just returned from 2 weeks in England with a Leica M, 35 and 50 summilux in addition to a Fuji X100T with a wide angle adapter.I decided to leave the APO at home. The Leica just works for me. The Fuji developed a mind of its own, which I will address now that I'm home. In all honesty, a short zoom would have been nice for vacation photos. I shoot for fun and the only gripe about the Leica is that the M240 is a brick. Much prefer the feel and weight of the film M's.

Rufus said...

Leica S.

The new one with the CMOS sensor.

Hyperbole and superlatives are justified. Buy it and gear lust is banished forever. You can even use adaptors and have old Hassy and Pentax 67 lenses. Don't let Precision Camera let you loose on one, you'll be selling the family silver.

Run an EM5.2 for the casual stuff.

Joe Gilbert said...

Just sold my house, but already have my favorite "for me" camera. Zeiss Ikon (Black) and the 50 1.5. Beautiful character wide open for portraits and stopping down reveals a more modern aesthetic.

Charles David Gryder said...

Whoa!...a thousand apologies! I read your site daily - I know full well you"re camera agnostic and have used Leicas in the past - thus my comment "I've had the same love affair with Leicas as you..". My poorly-worded sarcastic comment relating to Leica prices was not directed at you personally. I truly love Leicas - I don't think we"ll ever seen anything built like them again. Like many others, as I've aged, I can't see through them, focus them accurately, or carry them (too many knee replacements and I remember what a Leicaflex and 4 lenses weighs!) And even if I could afford it, I'm a bit uncomfortable carrying a small camera bag with $15-20K dollars in it. I suppose if you already have some M or R lenses laying around, putting them on a Sony A7 series is not a bad idea - but I'm not sure starting from scratch and buying them is a good plan.
I've worked in a camera store in the SF Bay Area for 34 years, and see/handle/rent Leicas almost daily. Like you, I've often gotten the bug for another M camera (the monochrome especially) with a 35 or 50mm lens - but then I go out and shoot with my EM5 and 20 or 25mm lens, and the GAS pains go away! Again, my apologies - did not mean to insult you...love your blog, keep it up. If you've got the disposable income - buy a Leica. You'll be poorer....never sorry!

neopavlik said...

Two trains of thought for me.

1.) A7R2 ( ideally the auto focus adapters continue to progress ) + Nikon 24 1.4G + Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art + Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art + Canon 85 1.2 L II + Nikon 105 DC + Zeiss 135 1.8 + Canon 200mm 1.8 L

2.) Hassleblad 503 C with Digital Back plus 3-4 prime lenses.

Happy with what I've got though.

Anonymous said...

Current Olympus OMD bodies with Pro lenses...

Anonymous said...

Finances aren't what's holding me back from a "dream" camera system: Reality is ;-)

Seriously? I'm never going to carry a Leica S on my daily treks. I've briefly sampled it and it's nice, but it's also a brick. Give me a digital Mamiya 6 instead.

Leica M: Been there, done that. Digital M is okay but IME the grass isn't greener there, it's just a different shade of green. Love the compact size of the lenses. Alas if Consumer Reports were to rate the incidence of defects and repairs as they do with automobiles, it'd be mostly half-black circles. Usually small stuff but I wish shipping stuff back to Leica New Jersey for some sort of adjustment wasn't practically a ritual to owning a new Leica product. Fans are far too forgiving.

I plan on picking up Sony's new 90 FE macro lens later this year. Never have owned a longer macro lens before so I'm looking forward to it.

Jeff in Colorado

John Krill said...

If you go to the Nikon web site and on the lenses page select only DX primes there will be 3 lenses listed. The widest being 35mm.

That's why I left Nikon and moved to Fujifilm.

I've started with a used Fujifilm XPro-1 and a new 27mm f2.8 lens.

In the future I will get a variety of prime lenses but currently I'm happy with the current setup.

I'm waiting for the new XPro-2 to come on the market. I'm not concerned about the sensor as I am about the ergonomics of the camera. I'm hoping they have move some dials and buttons.

But no matter the Fujifilm XPro is my camera of the present and future.

Good-bye Nikon.

shooter said...

I'm already there Kirk, I have a minty 501CM with 80cf lens and a couple of older forty plus years lenses 50 and 150, for small stuff
I have an Olympus OM2n with 28,50,and 100 lenses the om I picked up and like the bad it was mint.

I too think of the leica M but it would have to be the 3 or 4 film all the way for sure. Leica now is for the minted only

Rob said...

I feel i'm getting very close to a perfect analogue system with my Nikon FE2 and 28mm F2.8 and a Hasselblad 500CM with 80mm 2.8

If price was no objection i'd get the digital back for the Hasselblad and the 110mm F2 Zeiss lens.

A really nice sturdy Gitzo Tripod, A set of ND filters and I would buy a lovely run down building in Bristol or London and turn it in to a gallery/studio/darkroom/office and have an adjoining workshop for my Fiance to do her carving/drawing/painting (as money is no objective) and get a little cairn terrier called Gobo (I'm a lighting designer currently)

But i'm still in my twenties so it might all still happen!

Oh and go on then a Leica M6 as well! (as we are dreaming)

Anyway I should stop dreaming and go shooting or it'll never happen!

Many thanks for your site by the way, love reading through the blog posts whilst on a slow shift at work.