7.26.2023

Changing gears for a day. After the studio shoots I'm cycling back to a smaller, handier camera for a spell. Blame Robert Frank.

too many gadgets? The hand grip, the thumb grip....

Here's the "stripped down" version:

Less comfortable. But less bulky.

The purist's configuration.

Have you ever clicked on to a documentary about a favorite photographer and, when the show finished you were ready to adapt his style for your own work? I've always enjoyed the work of Robert Frank. I think his photography is direct and fearless. So I was happy when someone sent me a link to a documentary with and about Robert Frank, on Amazon Prime video. It's called "Don't Blink." 

The video was done in 2015 and Frank was, at the time, in his late 80s or early 90s. He was still quite sharp, irascible and opinionated. In part of the video he was walking around on the Coney Island beach and reminiscing about a series of photographs he'd taken there 50 years earlier. He had photographed strangers on a beach packed with people and his photographic efforts went on all day and into the night. 

In this scene he talks about using a small and discreet camera and moving quickly. Shooting quickly. As he's talking about this the video camera pans to a young, current-day photographer walking around on the beach with a big DSLR, big zoom lens, big camera bag hanging off the shoulder/back. Sticking out like a huge, sore thumb. And Frank remarks that to get the images he wanted when he shot there he had to be less obvious. Less plodding. Less stiff. He had to move fast and carried only one small camera and lens.

Through the video the only time a camera is in the frame it's a small screw mount Leica camera with an equally small 35mm or 50mm lens on the front. That's it. No zooms. No light meter.  No telephotos and (obviously) no special mirror gadgets involved.

Watching the video triggered for me a memory from an earlier time in my non-linear progression as a photographer. I was working as a copywriter for an ad agency and my passion was photography. At the time I was using an ancient Leica IIIf screw mount camera. A camera model that dates back to the early 1950s. A time before the M series Leicas were introduced. 

I was always working on a budget so I rolled my own film with a bulk loader. Always Tri-X. And when using those earlier Leicas you had to trim the leader of the film in a certain way if you wanted the film to load and advance properly. Scissors were a necessary accessory. Always. Probably the sole reason I first bought a Swiss Army Knife. Always having scissors in my pocket. 

One week I took a break from work. It must have been in 1979. I was at my parent's house in San Antonio and itching to go somewhere out of the country, to have an adventure and take photographs. This was long before I was married. Long before I had any sort of responsibilities. No constraints on my time.

I packed a few pieces of clothing in a small backpack, dropped all of my gear (one Leica IIIf, one 50mm f3.5 collapsible Elmar lens, my Swiss Army Knife and twelve rolls of hand rolled film + a passport) into a small shoulder bag. A repurposed, non-photographer bag. And asked my older brother if he'd drop me off at the San Antonio airport. This was a time in which one could arrive at the airport, look around at the various destinations on offer right now and be on an airplane heading somewhere within a half hour. Security check? Didn't exist.

The destination that looked best (and cost least) was Mexico City. I paid $36 for a plane ticket and headed out. I arrived at the airport in Mexico with no hotel reservations and no real plan but I'd read about a hotel on the Zocalo (main square) and it seemed interesting so that's where I headed. I spent a week going to markets, the park, the pyramids outside of the city, the Zone Rosa, the Anthropology Museum and even the National Pawnshop. I had a wild breakfast one day at Sanborn's House of Tiles and walked without fear or trepidation through the downtown  a couple of nights at two or three in the morning. 

My constant companion was the tiny Leica rangefinder camera. So many good memories even if the photos I took were less than spectacular (no light meter, still learning to print, still learning my way around composition). It was the process, the time spent, the adventure that made the trip an important one for me.

What an interesting time. No cellphones. No internet. No credit card. No schedule and no fear. Just one very small, very rudimentary camera and  the desire to make photographs. To see things. Heaven.

So this morning when I woke up I was still thinking about Robert Frank, photographic adventures, small cameras, discreet photography and thinking....even if "discreet" isn't the pressing issue, how much fun it was to travel so unencumbered. So light. So quick and so free.

I had a camera in mind today that I thought I'll circle back to. It's the small, handy, Leica CL. The digital one. That and the smallest modern lens I could find. The little Carl Zeiss 28mm. It's like a 42mm (short normal) on a 35mm camera. The camera is also just about the size of the old IIIf...

I set the camera to shoot black and white. I'm enthralled with it. But mostly as a symbol for adventures. So much history calling out to photographers....

And here I am getting ready to shoot a portrait in the studio with a big MF camera. Odd times.

Would there be a market for a camera like the ancient Leica IIIf I shot with? No frills. No automation. No huge size. No high value. Just a lens, a shutter and a sensor. Not even a light meter? I'd buy one. But then I'm eccentric enough to part with the cash...  You?

 

22 comments:

Chris DC said...

Kirk:

Coincidence. I stumbled upon a Leica IIIf with the 5cm Elmar at a garage sale a few years back. I got it repaired and have enjoyed shooting B&W film. Mostly I photograph events like parades and historical sites. It is fun to make images that look like they were taken in 1952. I think lots of the smallish cameras (Leica CL, Sigma FP) can be set up to work just like the old Leica IIIf. Is there a market? Who knows:)

CDC

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Chris, That's so cool. I still have the IIIf around here but I need to send it to DAG or somewhere else and have the shutter repaired. It was such a reliable camera. I think it went 50 years until the shutter finally gave out. Try that on a new, digital camera.

I agree about the Sigma fp and the CL. They are good approximations. I'm actually thinking of buying a couple of bright line finders for the fp. 35mm and 50mm and just shooting "old school." Zones for distance and a bright line for comp. Might make that camera just right.

Richard said...

Sadly, Amazon Prime Video here (UK) offers three videos titled “Don’t Blink” and a fourth that begins with the phrase but none are about Robert Frank. It seems to be available to buy as a dvd :(.

Richard said...

The Ricoh GR, and GRD before it, do the job of working like a film compact for me,. Bright line finder and snap focus, though autofocus is OK and the confirmation light is detectable while using the hot shoe finder.

Joe R said...

I have a Fuji XT4/35mm lens that I set to mostly manual settings. That is as close as I can come at this point but it is enough to occasionally get back to my B&W Minolta days.

Miguel Tejada-Flores said...

Kirk--

Your post made me remember a number of years, in the late 1960's, when I started taking pictures with an old Leica IIIf which belonged to my father but which he was kind enough to lend me (he wound up gravitating to a larger Nikon F which he preferred). I was only shooting Tri-X, hand-rolled from bulk roll (so much more affordable). I had a small Weston light meter too. The camera had a 50mm pop-out Elmar lens that didn't have clinical sharpness but it got the job done. I miss that camera in many many ways today.

The closest I've come to it is a small Panasonic Lumix GX9, whose rangefinder-styled rectangular body reminds me of the IIIf. The camera also has the nifty "l.monochrome.d" black & white jpeg shooting mode which comes closer to the look and feel of Tri-X than any other digital camera I've tried. With a smallish 15mm Panasonic-Leica prime (the equivalent of a 30mm FOV), it's a bit wider than the 35mm Takumar I used to use on my Pentaxes (which came after the IIIf), but with minimal distortion has an almost normal perspective (to me, anyway).

When I want to simplify my (admittedly already simple) photographic life, I just pick up the GX9. Admittedly the AF lens focuses differently than the ancient Elmar did, but some of my results... still seem to have some of the feel of the long-ago-TriX-only images that were all I made for years.

It's nice to limit one's choices. For me, less is definitely more.

Jarle VikshÄland said...

Fujifilm could probably make a good one based on the X-T30 or X-T3 bundled with a 23 or 35 mm f2.0 lens. Scale down the features, remove all auto, fixed screen, etc. No crop formats, wifi, video, just one or two BW and colour modes and thats it.

Get it into the hands of the X100V influencer crowd and sell it as "photography in its pure form". Sunny 16 rule could be printed into the base plate - or be available on screen.

What could they produce one for and what could they sell it for ?

crsantin said...

I much prefer the unadorned CL. I suppose Leica decided there was no market for such a camera and discontinued the CL. Such a shame. I absolutely love small, simple cameras. Small and quirky is great too. There doesn't seem to be much of a demand for one these days. Sure the Ricoh GR line has a bit of a cult following and the Fuji X100 but good luck finding one. We seem to be trending away from small cameras and lenses. Many mirrorless cameras now remind me of the DSLR equivalents without the mirror. I was hoping that mirrorless would bring about some sort of new direction in camera design. Some of the m43 cameras were getting there but they seem to mimic the old DSLR too.The Leica IIIf and the 5c Elmar can be had pretty cheaply these days and I'm tempted but film just seems a no go for me now. Maybe you could put together a post on the various options out there for those of us looking for small, simple cameras, some quirky options too?

Dogman said...

If I'm planning to be out photographing people, my "social" camera is either a Fuji X-Pro2 or X100S. Small, discreet and nearly silent in operation even on high speed continuous. B&W JPEGs are nice from these cameras and respond well to post processing in Silver Efex.

I used to use a couple of Voigtlander manual focus lenses with the X-Pros but I never got used to focus peaking (or, indeed, EVFs). Mostly I zone-focused but that was not always a wise thing to do. Fuji's small primes are excellent and I cannot complain about their AF at all so I use them now.

Robert Frank is a long time hero of mine. Can't remember the number of editions of "The Americans" I own as well as a stack of his other books. I think photographers of my generation learned photography by looking at Frank's work. He was the best.

Raymond Charette said...

Actually, Mr Kirk, 42 mm is really closest to real normal (43.5 mm is the diagonal of the 24 x 36 mm frame) for a ff camera. I know everyone uses 50 mm as a «normal» focal length, but this is technically incorrect, as you know. Using a real normal lens closes the gap between what we see and what is pictured. Have a great photo day!

adam said...

I've been looking at various cheap film cameras available at the moment (about the only new ones left), initially tempting but seeing sample pics put me off quickly, went down quite a rabbit hole looking at stuff on one site, all kind of films, black and white slide film that isn't too expensive, filed under "too much trouble" fairly quickly, I think my version of simple is just to set most things to auto, there seems to be a market for simple phones, buying a zoom gave the game away on the discretion front, I couldn't pretend to be fiddling with my camera when the lens was moving in and out

Edward Richards said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Edward Richards said...

My guess - The modern Frank would shoot with a phone. It is the ultimate f8 and be there camera. If you treat it like a real camera, it will take good pictures. (That includes turning off some of the auto enhancement stuff.) I have been working on using my phone the same way I would use a "real" camera and have been surprised at how well it does.

atmtx said...

I love this story, especially about your Mexico trip.

JereK said...

Same here in Finland. But its avalaible for rent 0.99euros at AppleTv or to buy 1.99euros. Will be watching it through there.

A small discreet camera is nice on walkabouts on streets. Really miss my Fujis. The Leica Cl would be nice to use but they are still very expensive here.

Richard said...

UK must have something against Robert Frank as it’s also unavailable on Apple TV despite being available, as JereK says, in Finland.

Bruce B. said...

Ricoh GRII, great little camera.

Don P said...

Kirk, you bring back a lot of memories. My first "good" camera was a used Leica IIIf, but with a 50 mm lens (later got a 35 and a 135). Also bought Tri-X in large rolls and "rolled my own." Loved the camera more than the 20 or so I've owned since then. Closest I come to reproducing the feeling today is grabbing an OM-5 with a 20mm 1.4 lens and wandering around shooting whatever the hell looks good that day.

Steve said...

I’ve found Vimeo’s On Demand service is a great way to access photography documentaries that tend not to be carried by the streaming services in my region (I’m in New Zealand). You can find rental and purchase options here:

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/dontblinkrobertfrank

Piotr Trumpiel said...

Kirk: "I think it went 50 years until the shutter finally gave out. Try that on a new, digital camera."

You're on! Same time, same place in 2073? ;)

Kind regards
Peter

Bob said...

2073 it is! I just picked up a Sony (don't shudder now) A7C with a 40mm f2.5. Trying to dial it in to something like Tri-X but still flipping the iPhone out there. The poor man's present day Leica rangefinders?

John said...

Seeing the headline of cycling I thought you had taken up triathlon - you would probably do well.