Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Ordering Leica MP
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ordering Leica MP

post #1 of 184
8/19/11 at 3:05pm
Thread Starter 
So, I think I'll be ordering a Leica MP soon, for delivery some time before the end of the year. It's going to have a black paint finish (as opposed to chrome, or black anodized chrome) and vulkanite covering. Something like this:

500

The only real difference is that the covering on the above camera is a smoother material than vulkanite. Vulkanite is slightly shinier, and has a big, pebbled grain.

The key decision I'm facing is how to have the top of the camera engraved. The standard for the model is this:

500

However, you can also have the camera engraved like this:

500

The latter resembles the way Leica has traditionally engraved their cameras, going at least as far back as the M3 in the 50's. However, it is also less minimalistic, and hence arguably less in keeping with the camera's overall design and function.

For further context:

500

Torn. Thoughts? Both camera/Leica junkie and non-junkie opinions desired.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 184
8/19/11 at 6:23pm
Thread Starter 
What, nobody here likes cameras or Asian people?
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 184
8/19/11 at 6:24pm
Why do you want an MP instead of an M9-P?
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 184
8/19/11 at 6:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post

Why do you want an MP instead of an M9-P?

Want film, not digital. Anyway, the "P" in "MP" actually means something. The M9-P is just an M9 styled to look like an MP, with a sapphire LCD screen. It is no more durable or better made than a regular M9.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 184
8/19/11 at 7:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


500

I like the traditional look - seems more prototypical German for some reason.

I understand you enjoy the romance of film. But I've realized that I have neither the time nor innate skill to become good at film photography. Digital is easier, especially if I had your Photoshop skillz.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 184
8/19/11 at 7:53pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by poorsod View Post


I like the traditional look - seems more prototypical German for some reason.

I understand you enjoy the romance of film. But I've realized that I have neither the time nor innate skill to become good at film photography. Digital is easier, especially if I had your Photoshop skillz.

I'm not sure how much more skill one really needs for film. I figure if I want to take this hobby seriously, I can't depend on taking thousands of shots on a digital camera in hopes that only one turns out right.

Also, film looks different. The images appear more natural to my eye.
Edited by mafoofan - 8/19/11 at 8:10pm
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 184
8/19/11 at 8:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


I'm not sure how much more skill one really needs for film.

I like the instant feedback of digital. That's how I learn. I forget what I did to compose the shot if I have to wait to develop the film. I ain't no Cartier-Bresson.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 184
8/20/11 at 4:53am

Are you asking about the engraving ? How does it matter ? 

 

I am kind of surprised that a minor engraving is troubling you of all people 

Reply
Reply
post #9 of 184
8/20/11 at 8:10am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by poorsod View Post


I like the instant feedback of digital. That's how I learn. I forget what I did to compose the shot if I have to wait to develop the film. I ain't no Cartier-Bresson.

Maybe I will regret the choice, but I used to shoot film in high school and college. I enjoyed the discipline enforced by the process, but more importantly, I think the images are both more natural and beautiful at the same time. A sensor and film don't capture light the same way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aj_del View Post

Are you asking about the engraving ? How does it matter ? 

 

I am kind of surprised that a minor engraving is troubling you of all people 


It's no different from pondering how wide to make your trouser cuffs. I'm constantly surprised by how much members attend to their clothes while entirely neglecting the other objects around them.

Anyway, a camera like this is a hell of a lot more costly and permanent than any item of bespoke clothing one might wear.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 184
8/20/11 at 9:35am
If you're good at processing, you can get digital to look like film with a lot less effort than actual film. There is something to be said for having film "slow you down" but even an m9 will slow the process considerably.

I'd get an m9 and throw a 35 on front and be done with it.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 184
8/20/11 at 11:25am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfurey View Post

If you're good at processing, you can get digital to look like film with a lot less effort than actual film. There is something to be said for having film "slow you down" but even an m9 will slow the process considerably.

I'd get an m9 and throw a 35 on front and be done with it.

I have to disagree. You may be able to approximate the grain of film, but that's not really what I care about. Lighting looks different on film--to my mind, more like what the eye sees.

Also, film has more longevity as a source medium. You can always go back to the negative and re-scan, as scanning technology improves. On the other hand, who knows how easy or hard it will be to work with digital image files 10-20 years from now.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 184
8/20/11 at 1:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


Want film, not digital. Anyway, the "P" in "MP" actually means something. The M9-P is just an M9 styled to look like an MP, with a sapphire LCD screen. It is no more durable or better made than a regular M9.

How will you develop the film? How about prints?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 184
8/20/11 at 1:36pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post


How will you develop the film? How about prints?

I can develop B&W easily enough at home, and I can learn to process color, or send it out to a lab. I have a Nikon 5000ED dedicated 35mm scanner to scan the negatives.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 184
8/20/11 at 1:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


I have to disagree. You may be able to approximate the grain of film, but that's not really what I care about. Lighting looks different on film--to my mind, more like what the eye sees.

Also, film has more longevity as a source medium. You can always go back to the negative and re-scan, as scanning technology improves. On the other hand, who knows how easy or hard it will be to work with digital image files 10-20 years from now.

Photography isn't my hobby, it's my career. That said, take the advice with a grain of salt...

Lighting most likely looks better to you because most film is warmer than the relatively color neutral digital files. And because most film shooters don't develop their own negs, they're oblivious to the process of darkroom processing. A digital file processed properly can and will look exactly like it's digital 35mm equivalent. Medium format film is a different beast.

The longevity is a moot point. A RAW file will always be a RAW file, even if the technology changes (which it will), someone will develop a means to convert said files when the time comes. They're still relatively lossless.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 184
8/20/11 at 3:27pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfurey View Post


Photography isn't my hobby, it's my career. That said, take the advice with a grain of salt...

Lighting most likely looks better to you because most film is warmer than the relatively color neutral digital files. And because most film shooters don't develop their own negs, they're oblivious to the process of darkroom processing. A digital file processed properly can and will look exactly like it's digital 35mm equivalent. Medium format film is a different beast.

The longevity is a moot point. A RAW file will always be a RAW file, even if the technology changes (which it will), someone will develop a means to convert said files when the time comes. They're still relatively lossless.

I've followed the endless debate on this subject and came to my own conclusions based on what I've seen for myself. I have no interest in spending thousands on a digital camera and I prefer to use film because I think it yields potentially better results. Yet, none of this is relevant to why I started this thread.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Ordering Leica MP