I want a Leica M11-P. I can afford to buy one but I am too "careful" of a shopper to spend the $10,000+ required to buy one brand new, in a box. I have three other M cameras so it's certainly not a case of "need." Especially since I am no longer working for clients who might have various requirements that require specific cameras. Does this mean that Leicas, in general, are "Veblen" goods, as one blogger is quick to label them? Well, it's more complicated than that...
There seem to be two kinds of camera enthusiasts who buy brand new M Leicas. Current model Leicas. One group buys them because they appreciate the industrial design, want to own the "best" product in a category and, to them the price is a small fraction of their net worth and so almost indistinguishable from the cost of a different brand. The second group are photographers, professional or not, who consider their choice of a Leica model as the absolute right tool for the work they want to do; the kinds of photographs they want to take. Most have been around the block, tried multiple systems and landed on a Leica M or even an SL model as the perfect distillation of simplicity and optical performance they've been looking for. Once acquired theses folks tend to stick with their cameras until they've mostly "used them up" or a series of upgraded models have finally added enough additional performance to make a new purchase seem both desirable and rational to them.
I imagine the first group upgrading to a new camera with each totally new model. For example: upgrading from the M240 to the M10. And then from the M10 to the M11. But I imagine that a person who is power using their Leica m240 learns it so well and so completely that an upgrade to an M10, with the same resolution sensor, doesn't make a lot of sense. If the M240 is currently working for them then the M10 only offers a few differences. A thinner body. A much reduced battery life. A similar sensor with slightly better high ISO performance. For this group the logical step is to go from an M240 to an M11 in order to get the advantages of the 60+ megapixel sensor and all the improvements that were introduced in the M10 series and further augmented in the M11 models. A better finder, more resolution, and, in the case of the M11, internal memory, USB battery charging and a faster processor. Skipping a generation and putting more actuations on the M240 shutter makes a lot of sense.
I'm happy that there are both groups. To my fertile imagination it's the people in the second group who provide the forward momentum for the brand. The folks who are committed to daily photographic work and who, most likely, have many successful images to show and success stories in which the cameras are often mentioned supporting co-stars. These are the people Leica points to when talking about the "legacy" of the brand. The Salgados, the Koudelkas, the Winogrands and the Meyerowitzs of the world. They kick the brand forward and are defacto ambassadors for the brand.
The vast number of people in the first group, the one's who want the very best in a category and are willing to upgrade at the drop of a hat, are the one's who actually drive enough high end sales to keep the brand in the black and make production of enough cameras efficient enough to make the products relatively cost effective. I imagine that the ratio of serious, daily Leica users to casual fans of the brand is something like one to ten, or more. We love the 90% of those who buy the cameras for the prestige of ownership (the cynical point of view) or the appreciation of classic design, or because they really do intend to use the cameras at some point in the future. We love that 90% because when new models are announced and finally arrive they tend to flood the used market with barely used camera models that still have years and years of great potential left in them.
Shutters that have been barely warmed up.
Rangefinders that have never been jostled out of alignment.
And all the packaging included.
While I love to shoot with Leica digital M series rangefinder cameras I've never found the financial courage to buy a current model camera body, brand new. I've never had the pleasure of experiencing the "new camera smell" I imagine hits one when a buyer opens the sealed box of an M11-P for the first time. Never experienced the thrill of formatting that first SD card to be inserted in a pristine camera slot...
But I've never spent ten thousand dollars on a camera that, in my working days, was superfluous to most of my assignments. Not that I didn't want to but because, being raised in a Calvinist environment, that kind of "splurge" feels wrong.
I have some history with Leica cameras and have purchased plenty of them brand spanking new. But that was back in the film days. The days of the M6 cameras and the R series cameras. Cameras that were generally much more affordable compared to other the pro models from other manufacturers. At a certain point in time it was less expensive to buy a brand new M6 that it was to buy a brand new Nikon F5. One could make choices without one seeming insanely extravagant. I bought three different M6 variants in the mid to late 1990s because they were available with three different finders. Variations for viewing wide angle, normal and longer lenses. It kind of made sense, especially since, in a pinch each of they could, with small modifications (bright line finders for using wide lenses on bodies designed for longer lenses), be used as back-up camera bodies for each other.
Near the end of the film era we were shooting with Leica R series cameras and I bought two R8 camera bodies, new from a Leica dealer. But again, they weren't considerably more expensive than the EOS-1n cameras or the Nikon F5s. Just different. More manual and less AF state of the art.
Fast forward to 2019-2020 and I had, by then, experimented with digital cameras from Fuji, Sony, Canon, Nikon and Pentax. I'd just ditched all of those cameras for the new cameras from Panasonic which were the first generation of affordable, full frame, video forward cameras available for the new L mount system. I enjoyed working with the Panasonic cameras but when the Leica SL2 came out with its 47 megapixel sensor and comfortably distilled user interface I was earning enough money in my full time photography business to take a chance on something radical. I splashed out the full retail price for the SL2 and the Leica 24-90mm lens. It's a great camera and a great lens. Was it worth $5600 + $5200 for the combo? Who is to say? I did a lot of work with the combination and still own them today. But I learned a valuable lesson when I went looking for a Leica SL back up camera. Prices do drop. Luxe cameras really are built to last.
I found the previous Leica model, the original 24 megapixel SL, a camera that had hit the market in 2015 at $7500+ US dollars, for the princely sum of about $2,000. It's been a workhorse and, for some kinds of work, I prefer the output of its sensor over that of the newer camera model. I have now used SL and SL2 cameras, day in and day out, for over five years. No changes to the system other than adding the SL2-S model about a year ago. And the SLs are still making great photographs!
While the SL lenses don't drop in value nearly as quickly, camera tech gets old quicker and so the market drives prices down quicker and more deeply with camera bodies than it does with lenses. This makes the older bodies a bargain --- to some users. If you need ultra flexible, ultra fast C-AF focusing the older SL models aren't a bargain for you. If you need endless video features you should also look elsewhere. But if you are a photographer who shoots landscapes, portraits, found art, documentation, etc. you'll find some bargains in the Leica bodies coupled with a huge number of L mount native lenses from Sigma, Panasonic and even Leica. You'll also find it convenient and fun to use top quality Voigtlander, Zeiss, Leica and Thypoch M series lenses on SL bodies (with an adapter).
While SL, SL2 and SL2-S bodies, found used and in great shape, can be considered a bargain for people who love nicely designed menus and beautiful industrial design on the physical aspect of the cameras the selling proposition when compared to Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Sony isn't hugely compelling. You can, with adapters, use the vaunted M lenses on just about any mirrorless camera body and, with the exception of some wider angle lenses, you'll get just as good results (for best results with wider M lenses you'll want one of the SLx bodies since their sensor micro lenses are designed to give better edge results with wide angle, rangefinder lenses and you'll have profiles, in camera, for the Leica M lenses...) as you would expect from the SL cameras.
Where everything really gets interesting is when you start looking into rangefinder digital cameras. Leica is basically the only show in town. A unicorn in the camera making business. A segment with few to almost no competitors. And there is something quite unique about focusing and composing via an optical rangefinder window and with lenses coupled to the rangefinder system. The M mount has existed unchanged since 1954. Introduced before I was born!!! And it means that over 70 years of M mount lenses are available and will work with all M cameras, from the M3 all the way through to today's M11 and M-EV cameras. Wow!
I think rangefinder cameras in general are an acquired taste. Many of the older generation of photographers started with rangefinder compact cameras with non-interchangeable lenses, like the much sought after Canonet QL17 from the early 1970s. They learned how to use the rangefinders out of necessity and it quickly became second nature to most. It's different now...all younger photographers have come into the hobby or profession at a time when autofocus ILC cameras were/are ubiquitous. Probably always at 99 or 99.5% of the overall camera market. Going "backwards" to a rangefinder is a tougher sell to that generation. But it does appear that the retro-chic of the rangefinder cameras body style is finding its younger audience! How else to explain the Fuji X100VI?
After using the SL (mirrorless) variants for three or so years I made the critical financial error of researching apochromatic corrected 50mm lenses that I could mount onto the my cameras. I found two. One was the 50mm Summicron SL APO for the Leica SL system. It's big, heavy and expensive. To buy one new was, at the time, about $5200. I searched for quite a while to find used ones but even they were priced around $4,000 and it just didn't mesh with my thoughts about lenses and pricing. There are a lot of great 50mm lenses out on the market for fractions of those prices and, I'm not sure I'd see the difference in performance with my cavalier, hand-held use case for most 50mm lenses. Most of the time.
Then I found the Voigtlander 50mm f2.0 APO Lanthar lens, which fit the bill and, across the board, got incredibly consistent high praise from both good and bad lens reviewers. The performance was, according to good sources, within nudging distance of Leica's own $9,000+ APO Summicron for the M series!!! Best part? The Voigtlander was priced, new, at about $1100. I bought one. And I bought adapters. Including the Leica M to L adapter (price of which was outrageous --- but performance? impeccable...).
And that, right there, the Voigtlander, was the gateway drug that got me back into wanting and subsequently buying my first Leica Digital Rangefinder (I had previously been loaned both an M8 and an M9 by Leica in order to write magazine reviews on those Leica products...). I used the 50 VM APO for one assignment for a huge medical devices company's project and the results were perfect. But a little tickle in my brain suggested that since I already had a marvelous M mount lens it might be fun to put it on one of the cameras it was designed for and see how that felt.
I started looking at M cameras. M digital cameras specifically. The M11 was priced out of my comfort zone and it was early enough in the sales cycle that M11s were still in short supply. The M10 range was interesting. The basic M10 camera has a 24 megapixel sensor but miserable battery life. A better finder than previous models but... And then there was the M10R which used a higher resolution sensor. about 45 megapixels but it still used the regular M10 battery. Since the base and R models were very recently brand new products the used prices remained high. When M11 supplies dried up (feast and famine for inventories) M10 used prices surged. So I started looking at earlier models.
Where I landed was on the M240 product line. A camera that was considered a workhorse by anyone who ever shot with one and a very reliable performer at that. It also has a 24 megapixel, full frame sensor but the body is thicker, front to back. The plus side of the size increase is that the battery for that camera pretty much lasts forever. Days and day. Thousands of frames. The only thing that cuts into its battery life is the use of live view. But then again, live view adds the ability to use an external EVF in the camera's hotshoe so, more flexibility. If you need battery endurance you use the M240 camera in the same way that people have used M cameras for decades and decades: manual, rangefinder focusing, composing on the optical viewfinder screen. No image review (unless you just have to have it). At that point the only thing the battery is serving is shutter cocking and image processing in the camera. No other fancy stuff.
When my favorite Leica dealer got in a good body (just back from a CLA at Leica) at a reasonable (sub-$3,000) price I decided to jump in. With a 50mm on the front the camera was everything I was looking for and most of what I remembered from having the M6s, M4s, M2s and the original M3 (single stroke).
Not as easy to use as an auto everything, mainstream camera but then you do know about my continuing idea that it's the little bit of friction in creative processes that sparks the most inspiration...
If one is unwilling to disregard the idea that current Leica M series lenses are far and away better than lenses from other makers you are doomed into spending prodigious amounts of money, even for recent, used models. If you are willing to believe that the configuration and construction of the cameras can be a powerful driver of your ability to make great photographs but that lenses are somewhat less critical (assuming that most current ones from many makers are really great) then you might be able to cobble together a great system for not much more that getting a run of the mill Japanese brand system. It basically comes down, in my book, to how you feel about the use of cameras with rangefinders and optical viewfinders versus cameras that do everything via an EVF and a rear LCD screen.
While I am pretty much certain that some Leica M series lenses are superior to other lenses at the same focal length I don't fall into the camp that believes the differences between the very best 3rd party lenses and the Leica lenses is monument, big, moderate or even mostly noticeable in most applications. I became aware of this yet again recently when I compared the Panasonic 24-105mm f4 S lens with the much pricier Leica 24-90mm f2.8-4 lens. The differences between the two products, in the real world, were small-to-vanishing. I paid over $5,000 for the Leica zoom but I recently picked up a mint, used Panasonic zoom for about $650. Was there a demonstrable difference? Maybe. If I squint hard and look for absolute sharpness in the very far reaches of the corners of the frame. But for the most part? Nope.
And I feel like the same kinds of differences manifest themselves when comparing lenses made for M mount cameras from other companies like: Carl Zeiss (ZM), Voigtlander (VM) and now Thypoch. Carl Zeiss makes a 35mm f1.4 lens that routines blows away any competition, including from Leica for a cost of about $2200. Then there are the various APO lenses from Voigtlander. I like the 35mm and 50mm versions but look forward, I guess, to trying out the 90 and 28 APOs in the near future. Given that no Leica rangefinder M camera or lens has image stabilization and that the M cameras aren't really meant to be restricted to tripods, I have to think that the shaky hand holding of the cameras goes a long way toward squashing ---- or at least minimizing --- any real differences in optical performances.
I've compared the Voigtlander 50 APO and the most recent non-APO 50mm Summicron from Leica and, honestly, I prefer the overall rendering and performance of the Voigtlander. At about 1/3rd the price of the Leica.
I've found that the M240 cameras are pretty fantastic when it comes to actual imaging performance. The sensor is a very good one. Not as good as current sensors when it comes to high ISO performance but in the envelope in which most people work (ISO 200-3200), when exposed correctly the files really shine.
The only issue I have with the original M240 cameras is their fairly limited buffer. They are constrained to fewer raw images before the buffer fills up when compared to current cameras. Two variants are better. One is the M240-P. It's the professional version of the base camera and it doubles the buffer, removes the big logos on the front of the camera and replaces the Gorilla Glass on the LCD screen with a sapphire glass, which is tougher. A good condition M240P is harder to find than the garden variety but if you find one in good condition it's a great performance stopgap between the M240s and the M10 series cameras.
The one other M240 variant that I love is the one pictured at the top of the post. It's an M240-ME. It was launched in 2019, uses the same size buffer as the P version of the camera and seems more mature when it comes to exposure accuracy and quicker turn on times. I like them and I like the gunmetal finish a lot.
I just saw one in 9+ condition on a popular and reliable Leica site and probably would have purchased it if I wasn't already knee deep in camera bodies at this point.
To sum up, I guess my basic premise is that Leica M series cameras, and to a greater extent, Leica SL series cameras are only brutally expensive and perceived as "overpriced" if you absolutely need to, or want to, buy the latest model brand new. No previous owners. No missing warranty cards. Yes, because of their scarcity, the fact that they are handmade in a country famous for paying a living wage, and being subject to irrational, hurtful tariffs, currently buying a top of the line Leica can feel frivolous, spendy and ill-advised. Unless you can depreciate your purchase or need to burn up some extra money on something fun.
The flip side is that the vast market of used, recent model, digital M cameras beckons. Bargains can be found. Smart purchases made, especially if you don't need the latest features and the current state of the art operating performances. If you just want a good, solid, fun and functional rangefinder based camera.
Match a good M series camera from two generations back with premium lenses from Zeiss or Voigtlander, or Thypoch and you'll have a fully functional introduction to using Leica M series rangefinder cameras with very little real imaging compromise. If you need to have your hand held by a nanny camera with every possible feature, and an ultra wide ranging zoom lens then indeed, these are not the cameras for you. "these are not the droids you are looking for..."
All top line cameras from the big five camera makers are really, really good now. Better than ever before. All will do images proud and most of us will never see the difference. So at this point differences in imaging are no longer the point. Now the question is: how much fun is the system to use? How well does the camera menu distill down information and controls for you? Is the camera you are considering fun to use? And you get to make the choice from that point on. Is it a fit for you?
Advice: Never use a computer that's faster than the one you currently own. Never test drive a car that outperforms your current car. Never try out a camera that makes operation easier but picture taking more fun. You'll want it.
That's about it for today. No matter what camera you use it's the subjects you aim it at that are most important.
