I currently have a silver chrome M6 outfit, and am considering putting together a inconspicious (did I spell that right?) M outfit. I know that black is probably no more inconspicious than silver, but but I think it make one FEEL more invisible. I am thinking about a black M6 w/ the 4th version 35mm summicron or a leica CL and its 40mm lens. Any comments about the Leica CL -- given its size, would it not be the perfect camera for my needs? I have never used one and do not know anyone who owns one.

-- Stephen York (S.G.York@worldnet.att.net), November 02, 2001

Answers

Yes, the Leica CL might well be perfect for you. It is small, looks like a toy, but is capable of very high quality shots. You need to watch out that the metering system works (many do not and need repair). Rangefinder is less accurate than other Ms due to its small size. Nice viewfinder with 40mm/50mm/90mm frame lines available. The Summicron-C/Rokkor 40mm is very small and compact and,to me, is a lovely focal length. You might also want to consider a CLE which has 28/40/90 framelines and aperture priority AE - about the same siz as the CL, but usually $350 more expensive and no longer supported by Minolta, but repairs are possible by 3rd parties (as long as they have parts). Both nice cameras - but not as nice as a full blown M camera, but they are cheaper usually.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), November 02, 2001.

Inconspicious well I suggest this solution for a M6 as a street shooter. Check out the website at: http://www.cameraquest.com/mcom.htm

-- Albert Wang (albert.wang@ibx.com), November 02, 2001.

Stephen, I think being inconspicuous is a state of mind. If you feel like a sore thumb, you will project a sore thumb image. I have used a CL in the past and, although it does accept most M lenses and produces comparable images, it just feels and sounds a bit flimsy compared to the M6. I haven't used mine in years. Stick with the M6. Develop a style that makes you feel inconspicuous. Now, of course, if you're 6'7" and have a head of blonde hair, you'll never be inconspicuous in Asia.

-- Henry Chu (heninden@yahoo.com), November 02, 2001.

I agree with Henry. It's not the camera choice that makes you inconspicuous, it's your approach and attitude. There's nothing particularly conspicuous about your chrome camera, unless you're spotted by another Leica buff. You should check out one of the Street Photography forums for plenty of discussion of this. Among other things, you might start by holding your camera, prefocused to a "people distance", in one hand down at your side, with the strap wrapped around your wrist so you can't drop it. Just bring it up to your eye and shoot when you see something. Of course, even with this point-and-shoot approach you won't be inconspicuous if your body language says you're doing something dramatic or sneaky. Just do it and move on.

-- Tim Nelson (timothy.nelson@yale.edu), November 02, 2001.

I'll 2nd Henry Chu's comments & suggest that you stick w/your chrome M6. However, if the black finish makes you feel better & you end up taking more & better pix, then go for it--it's your money, anyway, right? I would note that the M-Rokkor 40mm for the CL/CLE is a nice, relatively inexpensive, lens (& tiny, too) that's worth buying by itself.

-- Chris Chen (furcafe@cris.com), November 02, 2001.

I now use my Leica for all my shooting. Family shots, local events, streets, "serious efforts", etc. I eschew bulk, bags, caps, gear, etc. What I take is my black M6TTL with a 35/2 *or* a 50/2 lens. I taped a brown Fuji film can on the Leica strap (which is adjusted to its shortest possible length) so I have an extra roll of film. That's it, period. I hang the M around my neck and go. I am talking about having it hang there all day. I did this at the air show a couple weeks ago, at a church day-long festival last week, to the park, the mall wherever. I've got the M and a little 'cron hanging there, naked to the world.

Guess what? No one ever pays one whit about the camera. Never! I pulls it up, snaps a shot or two and moves along. Who cares? Nobody but me (and my son who is tired of having his picture taken). It might as well be an Instamatic! (anyone remember those?)

I will say, in deference to the heavy/hard knocks the M may give/take, I have ordered an Op/Tech neoprene Rangefinder case that I will give a try. This should keep my kids from getting those nasty head-bumbs, and I’ll feel better when I toss the M on the dashboard of my Jeep Wrangler.

The moral of the story…Leicas are just plain old cameras, really!

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), November 02, 2001.

I completely agree with all the comments above - you certainly do not need a CL or CLE to make it work - you already have the best! My comment is solely meant to say that either of those cameras will work very nicely too. The only plus of the CL is that it is even less "aggressive" to look at than an M6, but it is also marginally less capable. I too feel that black is less conspicuous - but it is largely how you do it, as the others say. I am 6'5 plus and never feel particularly inconspicuous unfortunately...

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), November 02, 2001.

FWIW, I too would buy another M6. A TTL in black. Black is always more inconspicuous than silver, and that is why >95% of all pros' cameras are always black.

Black is less easier to be seen by most objects and this is important where photography is forbidden, like on some police-controlled areas and borders. Also, black itself is less critical when reflection can occur, for example on a sunny day from glass window panes etc. Most good tripods today are also all black (whether you want a tripod or not).

For me personally -- although I always wanted to get a silver M2 or 3 or 4 or 6 for nostalgic reasons -- black is "better" simply because the white or yellow time and aperture/distance values seem to be more visible to me than the black or red values on chrome. Finally there may be also the question of colour-matching: black lens or silver lens on black body and vice versa.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), November 02, 2001.

Why don't you just black tape it? Then you can spend the extra money on film. I find that "sticking out" is a state of mind. Read the "shyness" section (it's under techniques)of www.pinkheadedbug.com I think that it's a pretty good way to go about it. Hope this helps.

-- Ken (kk353@yahoo.com), November 02, 2001.

A black camera is reputed to draw less attention than a chrome one. That was first laid on me by a member of the Seattle PD Red Squad during an antiwar demo in the early 1970's, and claimed there was a LEAA-funded study to back it up. If I had a chrome body, I'd probably cover the chrome parts in black electrical or gaffer tape.

More important is attitude. If you're confident enough in handling your camera, and don't spend a lot of time tinkering with focusing and setting the exposure, you're not going to draw as much attention. Keep it prefocused to a likely distance to your subject, pre-set your shutter speed and aperture, then take the shot and move on. Never apologize, never explain.

-- Chuck Albertson (chucko@siteconnect.com), November 02, 2001.

As others have noted, conspicuousness is just a state of mind. I do a lot of in-close candid people photography with either a silver chrome M6 TTL (50mm Summicron) or Konica Hexar Silver (35mm Hexanon) - see examples at 4020.net/everyday as well as the seven images at: nemeng.com/photo/fom2

All the latest shots were taken at a distance of 2.5m facing the subject.

-- Andrew Nemeth (azn@nemeng.com), November 02, 2001.

I just need to throw in some support for the CL. Which I think is a great camera (as long as you are comfortable with it's limitations). For me it is smaller & faster than a M and therefor less noticable. Being a tiny camera, it's also very easy to hide.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), November 02, 2001.

I wonder if Silver Chrome is more conspicuous? Black has a sort of Darth Vader quality, that is off-putting in social settings (birthday parties etc). Smaller and older and chrome is less conspicuous, definitely.

Also, in a material world, nobody pays any attention to people with small old-fashioned cameras, they can't possibly be taking any serious pictures, people think. They are likely desperately financially disadvantaged types who should be ignored lest they ask you for a small loan until next Tuesday.

I think brown everready cases have this effect on people as well. "Poor guy hasn't been able to buy a new camera in 50 years-lets avoid looking at him".

Who knows???

All this is pure speculation, as I awaken with a morning cup of coffee :-)

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), November 02, 2001.

The camera has nothing to do with conspicuous or inconspicous.

Alan Gibson, who has been somewhat missing from the net but used to be around these forums, took candid shots in New York with a 4x5. It was amazing, the subjects were oblivious to the camera.

You could shoot with a Minox, but if you're not doing it right, people will immediately react. You can shoot with a Graflex, but if you are doing it right, no-one will notice.

I once saw a woman I wanted to shoot in a restaurant. I went over to her table and asked her, and sat down. We were talking for about ten minutes. I shot five or six frames with the camera to my eye, and the camera had a motordrive, and when I got up to leave, she asked if I was going to take her photograph.

When I travel outside the US, I take a Mamiya 7. I have shot with that camera, the 43mm lens, and the finder for that lens, a very large and prominent camera, without being noticed.

The shot below was taken about three feet from the subject. She never noticed, never reacted, but I was there for at least three minutes.

Blonde, Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer

You see, you have to make yourself inconspicuous, not the camera. It requires submerging the ego, saying to yourself "I am nothing" and letting the camera do its thing while you disappear. I met a very successful photographer who does war, political violence, all sorts of wild stuff in Latin America. He's physically large, especially compared to the people he is around in these situations. But no-one knows he's there.

Skill is always, always,

always

far more important than choice of equipment.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), November 02, 2001.

Sorry, but I can't agree that skill is not always, always, always more important than equiptment. Most of us who really like our Leica most when we are out using it might be tempted to claim this to be true- it has the wonderful connotation that what we do is so personal and artistic- and not just a series of technical steps. There is, however, a minimal threshold for equiptment, below which it becomes quite futile to try to take good photos. Fortunately, most cameras exceed this- especially Leicas. On that note, skill is very important- and in regard to Leicas perhaps the defining feature. However, when one is in the mood to discuss equiptment- even where it is all of good quality- one should go ahead and seek out those who can espouse the subtleties of each piece of equiptment. I find I get like this as I gear up to purchase something-- and then forget it afterwards as not to second guess a choice already made, but most significanly to focus on developing what matters- skill.

-- Silas Larsen (slarsen@mail.colgate.edu), November 02, 2001.

Sorry, but I can't agree that skill is not always, always, always more important than equiptment

An unskilled photographer with all the equipment money can buy will never become good.

A skilled photographer can find a way to use any equipment and take a decent photograph. It doesn't matter what is used, somehow it will be better than that photograph by an unskilled photographer with all the Leica gear in the world. Sorry to break the news, but it's the truth.

Tower 4th Street, panoramic disposable, Copyright 1995 Jeff Spirer

Too bad Konica discontinued this camera, a disposable with a 17mm lens. Reloaded with black and white, some amazing things could be done.

Fulton, panoramic disposable, Copyright 1996 Jeff Spirer

How come the people who always make the biggest deal about equipment never have photos to show? Just wondering....

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), November 02, 2001.

Thank you all for the informative posts. I did have to respond to Jeff's: Maybe some of those people who talk about equiptment -- who you, compared to, no doubt consider yourself to be a better photographer -- do not have the means to post pics on the web. I do not know how to post pics on the web, but then I do not have anything worthwhile to post. There is actually a saying that I read some time ago that went something like "beginners think about equipment, journeymen think about composition and experts think about light." I have no illusions that after 2-3 years in photography I am still within the first category. It is, however, poor taste to point this out.

I did not realize this discussion group was limited to "non- beginners" and it is a truism that everyone was a beginner at one time.

Nice picture though.

-- Stephen York (S.G.York@worldnet.att.net), November 03, 2001.

How come the people who always make the biggest deal about equipment never have photos to show? Just wondering....

I would gladly post- but I don't have a scanner (don't envision getting one anytime soon now that I've invested not a little $$$ in Leica), and haven't found a better way to digitize my stuff. I went to one lab and wasn't very impressed by the images.

I am impressed that you seemed so close to that woman in the white dress in that shot (on Telegraph Ave in Berkeley?). Was it so crowded that day?

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), November 03, 2001.

I have to agree with Jeff here.

Blending in is a skill that is somewhat independent of the equipment you are using. Some people find it easier to do this with small cameras. But I've taken candids with both sorts of Hexar, Mamiya 6 and a big noisy Nikon SLR with equal rates of success.

It's all about hanging around until people forget you are there and then going to work to find the good situations.

I have to say, I'm not very good at it. I like do buildings better than street stuff.

-- Pete Su (psu_13@yahoo.com), November 03, 2001.

Stephen: to get back to your original question: I wouldn't sweat the camera color - black may be a tad less conspicuous, but chrome has that 'amateur's old camera' look, which may also help in lowering defences. I noticed when using chrome Nikon FAs that I often got better responses from people than with a black 'Darth Vader' N8008. Personally I wouldn't expect much improvement from a CL - it isn't THAT much smaller.

Jeff is correct that personal technique is important, but every little bit helps. The nice thing about rangefinders is less that they are invisible than that they make the photography less intrusive - no SLAM/ BANG/WALLOP/WHIRR.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), November 03, 2001.

A black taped black M + small black lens (28 or 35 or 50 'cron) dangling over a black t-shirt/sweater is simply invisible. No bag, lenses and film in pockets of old darkish anorak. Cheap clothes, cheap shoes. Ideal outfit for street snaps. In hot weather and light clothes: camera strap on shoulder, M hidden behind arm, hand in pocket. For fast shooting: camera in hand, strap around wrist, hands in the back while strolling or hold the camera with hand over the lens along the body. Always preset exposure and try to preset distance. Fine tune distance on 2nd shot. Check exposure settings on 3d shot (if time allows).

A Rolleiflex (or any setup with waistlevel viewfinder) is also a good tool for sneaky shots.

But I do agree with previous posters, a view camera on tripod (or absolutely any camera) used by the right person can be a perfect tool to shoot candids.

All that said, I strongly disagree with those who suggest one should always plan to avoid interaction with subject before or after shot (aka "never apologize, never explain"): any person deserves to be considered as such if he/she notices you. If the subject looks at you before or during shot, you ought to acknoweldge the person, negociate the shot (eye contact and a smile usually are quite enough, words need not necessarily be spoken) and ALWAYS respect eventual refusal.

If the subject reaches out to you after shot, always talk, and even pay if required. Anyway, you will have no legal right to publish the image of a singled out recognisable person without explicit permission (unless you are a thief). You would not refuse such interaction if you shot a neighbour down your street, you should not avoid it if you capture the image of a person you do not know in a far away place.

Of course if all this happens in violent circumstances, run first, talk later....

-- Jacques (jacquesbalthazar@hotmail.com), November 04, 2001.

Technique is important, so are sensitivity and diplomacy, but equipment helps too. For some unknown reasons, people tend to get annoyed when they are being pointed with a big, intimidating looking camera. In preparing for a book, I have to take pictures in a place where the people are not particularly friendly towards photographers. After incurring the wrath of a woman with my Nikon, I switched to using a M4-P and a CLE, which are so small and quiet that people hardly pay me any attention while I take pictures. One time a colleague and I spotted someone doing something interesting, and when we both raised our cameras, that person immediately signalled to my colleague with her F70 to stop taking pictures while completely ignoring me with my CLE. My colleague has since dumped her Nikon for a Contax-G!

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), November 05, 2001.