Is it worth buying a Leica camera?

Yes.. It does depend on what you plan on shooting, but I believe it can absolutely be worth it. Leica’s hold their own in most shooting conditions, excel when lighting is ideal, and falter when lighting is poor. Leica’s are not designed to shoot concerts with crazy shutter speeds, or an incredible ability to rip iso like Sony, and Leica’s are definitely not designed to shoot sports on a 500mm lens (the longest native Leica lens is a 135mm). However, when shooting things like street photography, landscape photography, commercial photography, wedding photography, etc. Leica excels at delivering the highest quality photos while staying extremely compact and easy to travel with and set up (If you travel and are looking for a camera I 100% recommend a Leica). The financial problem with most modern gear is that it gets updated every 2-3 years, and depreciates quickly after a new model is released. While Leica does come out with new cameras, and their technology does get better, their past cameras don’t become obsolete in the same way that Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji do. Many of the Leica M cameras are actually still worth what they retailed, or more, while the new models of other brands (Sony a7 iii, Sony A7r iii, Nikon Z7 ii, Canon 5D Mk iv, Canon M6) still take phenomenal photos, they will be updated and used less once better versions of their cameras roll around. This DOES happen with Leica digital gear, but to a much smaller extent, and it’s quite the opposite with their film gear.

Do professionals use Leica?

Absolutely, and in fact Leica is so popular with professional photographers that many consider it a faux cult, because of how much adoration professionals and users have around the brand. If you’d like to see some images you’ve likely seen before (but didn’t know were taken with a Leica) check this out.

Are Leica lenses really better?

Yes. I will fully admit that I am not a 100% impartial judge (I’ve really only shot Canon/Nikon/Sony/Leica, and really only owned Canon & Leica), but I will give you a little bit of insight into why I think their lenses are SO much better. Leica glass for the M system is that much better than Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc. because they don’t have to place any electronics inside the lens. The lenses are manual focus, and you set the aperture with a ring dial around the lens, so there’s no need for microchips and electronics because the camera body doesn’t have to control the lens in any way. That means that Leica has never needed to change their mount (for the M series), so any Leica M lens is going to work on any Leica M body. My Summicron 35 V3 was made in 1968 (and yea I can check the dates on every single piece of Leica gear I own because they archive all of their serial numbers because they put that much thought and care into every piece of gear) and in size it is approximately 1/5th the length of the Canon 35 1.4 II, and performs significantly better. Far less chromatic aberration, much clearer photographs, and much smaller and lighter. On top of that, because you don’t have to put any electronics into the lens to control it, you can put much more effort and money into the actual glass and elements you’re putting on the lens, allowing my $1.5K-$2k Summicron from the 70s to majorly outperform all of my canon lenses that came out in the last decade and cost the same amount.

Is Leica better than Sony?

It really depends on what you’re shooting, Sony dominates many photography spaces with amazing low light capabilities, eye detection auto focus, and the ability to capture a high number of frames per second. However, I prefer the quality, depth, and colors that Leica is able to deliver over the incredible electronics inside of Sony gear.

Which is better, Zeiss or Leica lenses?

Zeiss and Leica lenses are very interchangeable and many photographers would consider them incredibly equal.

What is the cheapest Leica?

For film, the Leitz CL with a Summicron-C 40 f2. Other good options would be an M2, M3, or the Leica III series, each with different price points for various advantages/disadvantages over one another. Perhaps I’ll have to write another blog post about which Leica to get/how to jump into the world of Leica. For digital, likely the Leica D-Lux 7 Digital Camera, although I would definitely spend a little more if you can, and try and pick up a Leica M240 or Leica M262 used.

What is the best Leica camera for a beginner?

For film, the Leica M2/M3, for digital the Leica M240, or the Leica CL.

Why are Leica lenses so small?

Leica lenses are so small because no electronics have to be placed into the lens.

Does Panasonic own Leica?

Leica and Matsushita, also known as the Panasonic brand, jointly develop digital cameras. These products are sold as both Leica and Panasonic but Leica Camera AG is 45% owned by The Blackstone Group.

What is the most expensive Leica camera?

A Leica 0-series no. 122 just sold at auction for approximately $2.8 million but the most expensive retail Leica currently available is the Leica M10-P “Reporter” Limited Edition which will cost you $8,795.00 (for just the camera body). The most expensive retail film Leica currently available is the Leica MP 0.72 Black which will run you $5,295.00 (again just the body). The most expensive M lens is currently the Leica Noctilux-M 50 f/1.2 ASPH. Silver Chrome going for $16,395.00.

Which is the best Leica film camera?

From a technical standpoint, the Leica MP delivers absolutely everything that anyone could ever ask for in a rangefinder film camera. However, Leica purists may also tell you that the Leica M6 is the Best 35mm Film Camera Ever Conceived.

What is the difference between zoom lenses and fixed lenses?

Focal length is a HUGE topic of debate, but both types of lenses have their strengths and weaknesses. With prime lenses, like a 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm 1.4, the lens does not extend or, “zoom” so if you want to frame your subject differently, or get tighter (closer to the subject) in the photograph, you have to move your actual feet in and close the gap between the camera and the subject. However, with prime lenses you also get a better aperture for the price, leading to better portraits typically being taken with fixed lenses like the 35, 50, or 85. With Zoom lenses you get more control of what’s in frame, without ever moving, because you can simply zoom in and out. However, zoom lenses usually have a “larger” minimum aperture, like a 24-70 2.8, or a 70-200 2.8. That 2.8 is a “larger” aperture than the apertures of typical prime lenses (typically 1.4/1.8/2.0). Those extra aperture steps can let in more light allowing prime lenses to be used in worse lighting conditions and create better separation and depth of field in photographs. I personally only use prime lenses because they’re also smaller and lighter than zoom lenses.

Blog Layout

Switching to Leica

Q: Why is Leica so expensive?

Leica is expensive for a multitude of reasons, but the two easy answers are quality, and prestige. Leica’s are made with some of the best quality parts and have been manufacturing cameras for decades. They are also highly prestigious because of the quality and level of photographers who use them, and their durability; Leica’s do not just break.

Over the past year I made the switch from Canon to Leica. I looked at so many forums, blogs, comparisons, and sample images that I wanted to sit down to create a resource for someone who is in my former position—considering switching to Leica. Personally, I wanted to switch to Leica because their cameras and glass are so sharp, hold so much depth, have vast dynamic range, and simply and authentically capture light and color in a way I think no other camera platform competes with. However, I had some questions.. How hard is it to learn how to shoot a rangefinder? How does Leica change your editing flow? How does it compare to a DSLR? Why is Leica so expensive? Let's talk about it!

*Shot on Leica M240

LEICA VS CANON

**Disclaimer, so that you know where my bias lies, I began my photography career with an entry level Nikon, quickly switching over to Canon, stayed Canon for about 5 years, considered switching to Sony, and then moved to Leica. I also typically only shoot fixed lenses, but I did use the Canon 70-200 for wedding photography for a few years.

BUT FIRST

I want to begin by saying that anyone who tells you that any one camera platform is intrinsically better than all other camera platforms does not understand the vast range of gear that is available to the modern photographer. Many photographers veer towards Canon for their lens selection. Many photographers end up with Sony for their modern aesthetics, thoughtful ergonomics, and careful eye detection auto focus. Regardless of where you’re coming from, there are a few things you should know if you're switching from a different digital camera to a Leica. The Leica M platform is mirrorless and all manual. (I personally went with the M platform, but there's so many Leica camera and lens options out there like the Leica SL, Leica CL, Leica Q2 to name just a few). Within the Leica M, you’ll find a menu system with typical customization abilities, and you set iso in the camera, but other than that the Leica is designed to be operated by physical levers/buttons/wheels rather than buttons on a screen. Get ready for only manual focus. Set your shutter speed with a dial on top. Set your aperture on the aperture dial around the lens. It's still a digital camera but you can't set your white balance in camera. However, this is all intentional to imitate the feeling and use of a film rangefinder camera. And Leica seems to like to take control out of your hand and charge you for it.. (they literally charge the same amount of [$8295] for the M10 and the M10 Monochrom, the major difference, the Leica M10 Monochrom only shoots in black & white..) but, what Leica lacks in tech it more than makes up for in the way it captures the world. The raw sharpness, realness, and the way it captures light surprises me every time I pull the full size images up in Lightroom.

*Shot on Leica M240

Leica & Canon Gear

And first, let’s quickly talk gear. Cameras and lenses. Up until last year, I shot with 2 Canon 5D Mark III's, the Canon 24 1.4L II, the Sigma 35 1.4, and the Canon 70-200L II. I sold the 35 and the 70-200 to finance the Leica M240 and a Summicron 35 f2 V3, and then eventually purchased a Leica M6 and a Summicron 40 f2 (I prefer a fixed lens and wide angles so my next lens is definitely a 28 summicron). As a wedding photographer I have to have a solid 35mm prime lens for portraiture, wide angle ceremony/reception shots, good details, and fun wide dancing photography. Now let’s talk about rangefinders.

How hard is it to learn how to shoot a rangefinder?

Rangefinders are mirrorless cameras, where the user views and focuses the shot through the glass viewfinder on the back top corner of the camera, rather than through a mirror and the lens. This means that when you look through the viewfinder, you are directly looking out at what you are taking a photograph of and typically you get a greater field of vision because you see more than just what is going to be in frame. Inside of the viewfinder is a small rectangle that you can "align" with whatever you would like to be in focus. You move the focus lever clockwise and counterclockwise on your lens until whatever is showing up in the small rectangle in your viewfinder is lined up with what you are trying to focus on.

Rangefinders take some getting used to, and it's definitely harder to focus them in low light because you're actually seeing what's really in front of you with no digital adjustments (harder in the dark). But once you get used to manually focusing them with the focus ring, I have found that I never have to worry about a shot being unintentionally out of focus because I can see exactly where the camera is focused and precision is based on your skill, not the camera's microchip. As a wedding photographer it takes much more effort to get all my shots and all the spontaneous moments, but it's worth it for the delivered photos.

How does Leica change your editing flow?

Well, make sure you're ready for the file sizes. They're a lot larger than your average Mk III file sizes. My Leica M240 shoots a .DNG, short for Digital Negative Image File, created by Adobe, and a .JPG (2 files for every shot). Lightroom then uses both file formats to quickly display and let me edit/arrange my photos, while still being able to export the full quality photo from the digital negative file. My canon raw .CR2s were typically 25-30mb while the Leica .DNG file is 50mb and the .JPG is ~3mb. While this may not sound like a huge deal, if you're talking about 1000 photos, or one wedding, that's a difference of 28gb! And I can still remember when my iPhone only had 16gb of storage!

Colors and lighting wise, I barely have to change my presets (made for canon), there's a few tweaks I make with my oranges/reds/yellows because Leica handles skin tones and poor lighting color temperature much better than a DSLR.

How does it compare to a DSLR?

Shooting is a lot slower. Because every single adjustment to your photo, shutter speed, iso, aperture, all have to be manually set (no computer chips automatically setting exposures) and focused by hand, the Leica is much slower to work with. That being said, when I shot my Canon Mk IIIs on a wedding day, I would end up shooting about 1000-1500 photos and returning 400-700 of them. And with the M240 and the M6 I've been shooting about 800-1200 pictures and returning 500-700 of them. I believe a lot of this has to do with the fact that with a DSLR you can shoot from all sorts of angles and perspectives very quickly and all of them will turn out fine and in focus. But when you have to manually focus every shot it forces you to slow down and frame every shot intentionally. However, the major downside of the Leica platform is the poor low light performance, and that it is much easier to miss a moment when you don't have automatic focus.

What does it take financially?

Superior craftsmanship, quality, and decades of field testing. (The Leica I was first introduced to the world at the 1925 spring fair in Leipzig, Germany, while Canon did not come out with a camera until 1935). Also, while not everyone fully agrees, many believe that the upside of the Leica film M cameras and the lenses are that since they no longer manufacture anything but the MP, the film bodies and older lenses will continue to appreciate as they are very sought after, and there's not many of them left. Lens prices vary, but certain older lenses appreciate as the demand rises as they continue to compete with the newer versions, and even seem to add life to the photographs they take as time favorably wears on them. Leica also continues to raise the prices of the lenses as they become better and better, but I personally don't have the paycheck to go pick up a new summilux.

If you have any questions or want to see more of my work check me out on instagram, @blake.pnw <3

Quick before & after that's not perfectly aligned (sorry I cropped the photo while editing):

Before After

Is it worth buying a Leica camera?

Yes.. It does depend on what you plan on shooting, but I believe it can absolutely be worth it. Leica’s hold their own in most shooting conditions, excel when lighting is ideal, and falter when lighting is poor. Leica’s are not designed to shoot concerts with crazy shutter speeds, or an incredible ability to rip iso like Sony, and Leica’s are definitely not designed to shoot sports on a 500mm lens (the longest native Leica lens is a 135mm). However, when shooting things like street photography, landscape photography, commercial photography, wedding photography, etc. Leica excels at delivering the highest quality photos while staying extremely compact and easy to travel with and set up (If you travel and are looking for a camera I 100% recommend a Leica).

The financial problem with most modern gear is that it gets updated every 2-3 years, and depreciates quickly after a new model is released. While Leica does come out with new cameras, and their technology does get better, their past cameras don’t become obsolete in the same way that Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Fuji do. Many of the Leica M cameras are actually still worth what they retailed, or more, while the new models of other brands (Sony a7 iii, Sony A7r iii, Nikon Z7 ii, Canon 5D Mk iv, Canon M6) still take phenomenal photos, they will be updated and used less once better versions of their cameras roll around. This DOES happen with Leica digital gear, but to a much smaller extent, and it’s quite the opposite with their film gear.
Do professionals use Leica?

Absolutely, and in fact Leica is so popular with professional photographers that many consider it a faux cult, because of how much adoration professionals and users have around the brand. If you’d like to see some images you’ve likely seen before (but didn’t know were taken with a Leica) check this out.
Are Leica lenses really better?

Yes. I will fully admit that I am not a 100% impartial judge (I’ve really only shot Canon/Nikon/Sony/Leica, and really only owned Canon & Leica), but I will give you a little bit of insight into why I think their lenses are SO much better. Leica glass for the M system is that much better than Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, etc. because they don’t have to place any electronics inside the lens. The lenses are manual focus, and you set the aperture with a ring dial around the lens, so there’s no need for microchips and electronics because the camera body doesn’t have to control the lens in any way. That means that Leica has never needed to change their mount (for the M series), so any Leica M lens is going to work on any Leica M body. My Summicron 35 V3 was made in 1968 (and yea I can check the dates on every single piece of Leica gear I own because they archive all of their serial numbers because they put that much thought and care into every piece of gear) and in size it is approximately 1/5th the length of the Canon 35 1.4 II, and performs significantly better. Far less chromatic aberration, much clearer photographs, and much smaller and lighter. On top of that, because you don’t have to put any electronics into the lens to control it, you can put much more effort and money into the actual glass and elements you’re putting on the lens, allowing my $1.5K-$2k Summicron from the 70s to majorly outperform all of my canon lenses that came out in the last decade and cost the same amount.
Why is Leica so expensive?

Leica is expensive for a multitude of reasons, but the two easy answers are quality, and prestige. Leica’s are made with some of the best quality parts and have been manufacturing cameras for decades. They are also highly prestigious because of the quality and level of photographers who use them, and their durability; Leica’s do not just break.
Is Leica better than Sony?

It really depends on what you’re shooting, Sony dominates many photography spaces with amazing low light capabilities, eye detection auto focus, and the ability to capture a high number of frames per second. However, I prefer the quality, depth, and colors that Leica is able to deliver over the incredible electronics inside of Sony gear.
Which is better, Zeiss or Leica lenses?

Zeiss and Leica lenses are very interchangeable and many photographers would consider them incredibly equal.
What is the cheapest Leica?

For film, the Leitz CL with a Summicron-C 40 f2. Other good options would be an M2, M3, or the Leica III series, each with different price points for various advantages/disadvantages over one another. Perhaps I’ll have to write another blog post about which Leica to get/how to jump into the world of Leica.

For digital, likely the Leica D-Lux 7 Digital Camera, although I would definitely spend a little more if you can, and try and pick up a Leica M240 or Leica M262 used.
What is the best Leica camera for a beginner?

For film, the Leica M2/M3, for digital the Leica M240, or the Leica CL.
Why are Leica lenses so small?

Leica lenses are so small because no electronics have to be placed into the lens.
Does Panasonic own Leica?

Leica and Matsushita, also known as the Panasonic brand, jointly develop digital cameras. These products are sold as both Leica and Panasonic but Leica Camera AG is 45% owned by The Blackstone Group.
What is the most expensive Leica camera?

A Leica 0-series no. 122 just sold at auction for approximately $2.8 million but the most expensive retail Leica currently available is the Leica M10-P “Reporter” Limited Edition which will cost you $8,795.00 (for just the camera body). The most expensive retail film Leica currently available is the Leica MP 0.72 Black which will run you $5,295.00 (again just the body). The most expensive M lens is currently the Leica Noctilux-M 50 f/1.2 ASPH. Silver Chrome going for $16,395.00.
Which is the best Leica film camera?

From a technical standpoint, the Leica MP delivers absolutely everything that anyone could ever ask for in a rangefinder film camera. However, Leica purists may also tell you that the Leica M6 is the Best 35mm Film Camera Ever Conceived.
What is the difference between zoom lenses and fixed lenses?

Focal length is a HUGE topic of debate, but both types of lenses have their strengths and weaknesses. With prime lenses, like a 35mm 1.4, or a 50mm 1.4, the lens does not extend or, “zoom” so if you want to frame your subject differently, or get tighter (closer to the subject) in the photograph, you have to move your actual feet in and close the gap between the camera and the subject. However, with prime lenses you also get a better aperture for the price, leading to better portraits typically being taken with fixed lenses like the 35, 50, or 85.

With Zoom lenses you get more control of what’s in frame, without ever moving, because you can simply zoom in and out. However, zoom lenses usually have a “larger” minimum aperture, like a 24-70 2.8, or a 70-200 2.8. That 2.8 is a “larger” aperture than the apertures of typical prime lenses (typically 1.4/1.8/2.0). Those extra aperture steps can let in more light allowing prime lenses to be used in worse lighting conditions and create better separation and depth of field in photographs. I personally only use prime lenses because they’re also smaller and lighter than zoom lenses.

Newer Post >