- The LEICA-O-series camera: is anybody reallly using it ?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

Hi,

LEICA-collegue Yip (further down this site) confessed to enjoy handling and taking photos with the O-series LEICA. There were quite a few of these produced and hopefully sold to the public. Did they all vanish in collections or is anybody seriously working with it?

I find this little camera wonerful, but canīt decide on one right now.

Thanks for any comments. (Q courtesy to Alex S.)

Best regards

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), January 29, 2002

Answers

I saw one of these cameras in the showroom, but the price is a bit prohibitive for a "user" and seems more geared towards an "investor" (known politely as a "collector").

If I want to experience the good old days before I was born, I can always detach the viewfinder from an SLR (if it can be done) or lock up the mirror, or if I can't do either, just shoot without looking through the eyehole. And I won't use speeds faster than that on the "O" camera. No lightmeter to get in the way of my thinking. Voila! I saved myself $2,000 and experienced the beginning from a poor mans point of view.

My guess is that these cameras are safely stored in glass cases on display in people's homes.

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), January 29, 2002.


Wouldn't it be great if other companies followed Leica's lead here. Maybe Ford could come out with a new Model T automobile. I personally like to fool around with vintage cameras, but don't think I'd be likely to spend $2000 for something as funky to use as that camera. I have a couple of Voigtlander 120 folding cameras from the 1950's that are good fun to shoot with. Maybe a $500 screw mount Leica would be more up my ally if I was in a Leica retro mood. (as opposed to my "Modern" 48 year old M3).

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), January 29, 2002.

It would have been much better had Leica come out with a IIIg replica rather than the O, there would have been many more "users".

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), January 29, 2002.

Hello.The O Series appears to be a clever move by Leica to entice Leica officiandos into the spirit of the mark in it's early days.I think this little camera, originally produced and tested by Leica pioneers,to a total of some only 31 in number, would be a delight to handle and to take photos with.However,personally I don't think many collectors will be giving them a workout. I am not really a collector and am constantly taking phtos with Leica M, but last year bought an UR-Leica replica,a real retro body fashioned by one of the Wetzlar "apprentices" back in the sixties.These cameras can't take photos but wind on and click, and I believe were used by Leica distributors for promotion.Regards.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), January 29, 2002.

"Wouldn't it be great if other companies followed Leica's lead here. Maybe Ford could come out with a new Model T automobile." -- Andrew Schank

Andrew,

Come to India. I don't know if you are British, but we still have cars whose model style goes back to the 1950's, the Morris Oxford and the Austin Cambridge. They are called the Ambassador. This is a result of Fabian Socialism, a failed experiment of Harold Lasky and his economic theories that were embraced by the British colonies, with the exception of Hong Kong and Singapore. We export some of these to the UK as there is a small market for eccentrics who want that "days gone by" feel. The cars do look pretty. And they run exceedingly well given the lack of up to date technological advances.

We also have Harley Davidsons that were left behind by the US Army from the 1940's and 1960's. These are mostly modified to run the poor man's taxi service in New Delhi, with a four-person cab on the back. There's no mistaking that Harley sound. Still ticking after all these years.

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), January 29, 2002.



I adore vintage cars -- my two favorites being the 1935 Auburn "boat tail" speeder and the "coffin nose" 1936 and 37 Cord. I also adore the older non-4 eyes Rolls Royce Silver Cloud. I wouldn't own them, however, or even want to drive them for that matter. I like our unromantic but safe Volvo V-70. My taste in cameras is similar -- and probably it is the reader's taste as well.

The above analogy doesn't quite hold in regard to Leicas (an analogy between typewriters and computers might be better); nevertheless, I think this O series, while cute, is overpriced and unnecessarily difficult to use. This isn't even like owning an Auburn or Cord (with its frankly awful front wheel drive) but a horseless carriage -- or, better, flying the Wright brother's first airplane. If you want a vintage workout get a Barnack Leica, like a IIIf, at a fraction of the cost of the O.

Here is what's going to happen with the majority of O's. They'll be interesting to mess with for a while, but soon will be relegated to their boxes and to shelfs.

(Meanwhile, my IIIf needs a work out. Think I'll take it for a spin. And dream of how really cool it will be with the upcoming Abrahamsson Barnack Rapidwinder.)

Unless you have money to burn, think carefully about what you'll be doing with your O a few months down the line after the novelty wears off.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), January 29, 2002.


Enfield India still manufactures the Bullet, AFAIK, a late 1940s classic British motorcycle. Not to mention Wax Vestas matches (c. 1880 in Britain) and assorted tonics and ointments that would have been at home in an Edwardian medicine cabinet.

And of course, in the subcontinent, it is not unusual to find local photographers using view cameras and paper negatives. Don't know about glass plates-the last time I saw one being used was in the early 1980s.

What does this have to do with Leica? I don't know-I guess this kind of rambling addition to the thread is more LUG style. Sorry, Tony. Just this once.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), January 29, 2002.


Actually, I think my analogy of the Model T is a good one. You ever try to drive a car from that era? Nothing like driving any car even from the 1950's-very quirky and primative just like the "O" camera is. I can't imagine anyone using the "O" for more than a few rolls of film here and there before the novelty wears off. If it was $350.00 (like the Minox replica series)I could understand the attraction, but for $2000, I can't see the attraction unless you already own every camera Leica ever made and are missing one of these for your spot on the shelf.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), January 29, 2002.

Hello,

thanks for contributing answers to the O-series question.

Unfortuantely it seems most of us here are windowshoppers and do not dare to invest in this camera-gem. Perhaps Mr. YIP could submit some more impressions after he managed (hopefully) a few more rolls of film through it.

He seems to be the only hardcore fan who really produced a photo with the camera. The rest of the production sleeps on shelves Iīam afraid. Shame. Itīs good O. B. canīt read this.

Best regards

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), January 30, 2002.


For $2k I'd rather not. But I must admit, I've wanted one since I heard they were coming out. Its pretty cool looking. Someday, though I will buy a Leica Standard or model I.

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), January 30, 2002.


If only this thing was reasonably priced.

In writing the above somewhat sour, somewhat scoldy missive, I forgot that what makes us different from the Neanderthals is our love of decoration. The O is a form of decoration--as a Model T would be at this point. Well, who knows what using the O will do for you? You may shoot a few rolls, toss in on the shelf for a few months or years and then, suddenly, one morning tell yourself there is something special about the thing, leave all your M's behind when you go out and shoot the best shots you ever shot.

I would love to have an experience like that. But not for $2000.

I did take me IIf out for a spin. The experience was perfectly awful. But I realised I'd overloaded the thing with too many modern stuff. The VC round grip was unnecessary; the Ricco 20mm and the VC meter made it too top heavy. Next time I'll be down to basics.

And ain't gonna cost me no 2000 bucks neither!

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@pp.iij4-u.or.jp), January 31, 2002.


Hello. I am a filmmaker and own hundreds of movie lens with tens of famous brands. A lot of lenses I had converted into T mount for either Leica or Canon, Nilon SLR mount. I also collect photography lens and convert them for 16mm Bolex or 35mm Arriflex camera.

As my experience the difference only at wide open f stop. When close down they don't have any big difference. I also have Emar 50mm lens and Russia copy , I can not tell any big difference either when I used it for movie purpose for projection into 20 x 30 foot screen. Since it's a good copy of same design. Only name make the difference. Also consumer photo paper are limited by 50lpm resolution only. I have converted a $5800 USD Arriflex movie lens for my Nikon. And the 4x6 print is even not as good as Nikon or Leica for the print. Te reason is this high resoulution lens is too contrasy for high light and shadow, so it will not show good result on the print. What I mean each lens has it's limit and own purpose. As the O series Leica it's ojly a camera for showing off you have more money them the other people but it does not mean you can take better picture. Taking a good photo to formign your own soul on the photo not showing off your forutune on the camera. I even collect camera like Mitchell 16mm and 35mm which are the monther of Panavison camera. The lens for each camera weights for more than 2kg. But to speak frankly I am still a lousy photographer. Go to see all these great Rusiian film and Russian phtos soem time shown in NY MOMA , you will see there is another great demension in the other side of the world.

-- Jong Lin (cocodial@hotmail.com), February 18, 2002.


Jong Lin, we are honoured by your presence on this forum. May I say that I hugely enjoyed Eat Drink Man Woman and The Wedding Banquet? If you are a lousy photographer, I wonder what that makes the rest of us? ;-)

Listen up to words of wisdom from a master, folks.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 18, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ