I loved shooting landscapes with the Hasselblad. I mounted it firmly to the Gitzo tripod and fired the shutter by the cable release. Using the waist level viewfinder was inconvenient on the tripod, so I attached the prism viewfinder and the winder. My photo trips were always like a midnight disappearing act because of the amount of equipment. One day I stepped in a used camera shop and found the classic 500C. Compared to the square 503CW, it was very round and looked gentle. At that time, I was thinking that the best camera is the newest one. But, for some reason, I was attracted to the classic 500C and it was in my paper bag before I knew it. This was the beginning of "the swamp."
That day, I kept touching and looking at it, without working. Once I loaded a film, I went out for shooting with the body and one lens only, leaving all other hefty equipment home. Until then, I had never thought of shooting with a medium format camera handheld, and it was so pleasant to be free from the strict shooting style using the tripod. I used to aim for sharpness, so I stepped up from the 35mm to the medium format. But, once I shot handheld, I could only get blurry pictures and started to shoot wide open only. I guess I didn't have a talent to shoot in a serious manner. Since then, I became more interested in various classic cameras.
I knew Leica and what it was like. I was even thinking that my life is over once I start using such a thing, and to me, using Leica was just a cheap nostalgia. Some politicians say, "My policy has never changed." But, people do change, so they must watch their words. Yes, we do change easily.
Leica? Leica, huh. Leica, right?
I became interested in it before I knew it. Then I had a chance to touch the Leica M3 that belonged to one professional photographer. The lens was the Elmar 5cm F2.8. It looked very silver to me because I believed that a camera has to be black. I put the mysterious camera on my hand and I was surprised by the heftiness and the density of the material. It really looked like a precision instrument. I didn't know how to use it, and then the photographer turned the aperture ring. I was shocked by the large number of the aperture blades because the lens for Hasselblad had only six blades. And, the shape was beautifully round even though I stopped down. Then the photographer taught me how to focus using double images, and I was struck again. Finally, he let me press the shutter button and wind. Everything was so quiet and I got completely knocked out.
The photographer told me I can negotiate the price, but I politely refused the offer because I didn't know if I could use it well. But, 2 to 3 days later, I bought the exact same set at a used camera shop. I loaded a film and kept shooting. I knew I had to match the two images to focus, but I omitted it because everything looked clear in the viewfinder to a man who was so used to look at the SLR camera's viewfinder. Likewise, I knew there is a brightline frame, but I thought what I see was what I get in the picture. I strongly remember how I was disappointed with my first pictures on the negative. They were out of focus or/and not composed as wished. I regretted that I bought such a camera.
I didn't even have an eye for equipment. I thought cheaper is better, and I got the worst copy of a lens. The picture above is shot with that lens. I didn't even know why the picture got so dim. Now, I can guess because the lens was hazy. If I shot against the sunshine, the view in the viewfinder always got all white. But, still it was my first Leica. I was so happy and showed it to my friend who is also an enthusiast. He said, "It looks beautiful, but the viewfinder is very cloudy." Then he asked the price. I told him and he said, "That's about it."
Since then, I seldom used the Leica and it was covered with dust. Then, I sold it to buy another Hasselblad lens.
I had the Leica only for a short period of time, and I started to shoot with the Hasselblad again. But because of Leica's influence, I started to shoot streetsnaps handheld. In addition, I started to photograph people casually. Like many Hasselblad users I wanted to shoot a little more casually at eye-level. Should I use a 35mm SLR camera? No, that's too pompous. Then again, I started to think about Leica. But at the same time, I remembered the bad experience throwing 100,000 yen away in such a short period of time and I couldn't decide on buying it again. No, wait, everything would be fine if I get it brand new. I finally decided to buy a set of the modern body and the lens. Because my sense with money wasn't hopeless at that time, the price sounded astronomical to me. Still, I bought it because I wanted to master it this time. I grabbed my credit card and walked to the counter. They asked me the number of payments. I got so scared and answered, "20 times."
This time, I focused very carefully. The lens was brand new, so I was confident and went to the lab. I was moved to see the pictures maybe because of the bitter past experience or the big debt. At that time, I couldn't tell the difference between good and bad lenses, and even now I'm not sure about it. Anyway, I don't know what made me moved, but the people in the pictures were smiling. Those were the pictures I wanted to take. I was simpleminded enough to strongly believe that the camera must be Leica to photograph people.
Most people smile at Leica. I don't know if it's because of the unfamiliar and unique look, but it's so quiet that people don't even notice when they were photographed. These pictures show their candid faces and look fresh to them. I shoot, show, and they are happy. As a result, I realized how delightful to witness their best moments. I guess this happens because I used a Leica.
Medium format shooters usually stop down to around f32 when they are shooting landscapes. There should be lenses that have falloff, but it's gone naturally once they stop down. In such a world, falloff isn't welcome. Now, what about Leica? To describe in an extreme manner, it should be more difficult to find a lens that is free from falloff. Besides, these lenses mysteriously make me want to shoot wide open for no reason. The trick is simple: the depiction by residual aberration is fresh. Therefore, I gradually started to take the falloff for granted. I couldn't buy anything else because I bought the camera and the lens brand new, and I could only afford worn out lenses that were almost going back to the soil. If such lenses are made by other brands, they cannot even have their price tag. Plus, despite the pathetic conditions, their price is almost equal to brand new Japanese standard lenses. What the heck is this???
Still, regardless of my financial situation, I wanted to try the numerous kinds of lenses. I got one lens, sold it, bought other lens, and sold it again. Of course, my standard was the Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad. To be honest, there was no excellent lens, but I was just amazed by the Leica lenses. Some lenses are about equally expensive as an automobile, while other lenses are just around fifty to sixty thousand yen. They are all "Leica." The market exists because of the supporters. However, aren't they too lenient even though the hazy lens sometimes take a sweet and soft portrait? I even hear that everyone can feel the same deep emotion when they saw their first contact print shot by a brand new Leica. The God of photography must be too kind.
You're reading this article, so you must be intuitively attracted by something primitive in Leica cameras. They don't do anything for you, and as for the film M cameras, they don't do anything at all. However, once you fell in love with them, you must get them and after that, you have to check, think, and feel by yourself. A Leica always forces you to think about what you are looking for and what is necessary to get it, because what it only does is to open the shutter curtain for a certain period of time and close it. It doesn't even wind the film for you. The body shape is very flat. If you look at the topside, you'll find it has two parallel lines and each end is connected with a half circle. You may think it's hard to hold, but this is the minimal size to hold. It can't be any larger or smaller than this. There must be only a few people to dismantle Leica, but it's very interesting to see how simple it is made. For example, a screw is driven in only where it's necessary and this instance shows all the rest. This is what a Leica is like.
Everything unnecessary is scrapped off and it doesn't do anything more than necessary. This is good enough, I think. It's always the photographer who decides what to look, measures the distance, shoot to freeze the scene, and the capture the anima emerged while the shutter was open. I don't think it's necessary for a camera to do all of these and I don't even think it's possible.
Anyway, no matter what I mumble, it's nothing more than one silly talk of a follower. Maybe the people who invented the Leica M cameras may be saying, "He doesn't know what's Fotografie at all. Ha ha!"
Old and new, every Leica product has been mythical. At first, you want to try at random. Maybe you'll be excited to see the results of a deified lens and say, "There's a soul on this shot." In fact, it's just nisen bokeh. I think people want to dream like this because the camera doesn't do anything for them. They call a lens causing intense flare "a lens with a unique character" and they think it's up to themselves to take advantage of it. Maybe we can say that Leica products are the best "stock" that never deteriorates in many senses. I digressed quite a bit, so I summarize. If you're interested in Leica, just get it in your hands.
