Elliott Erwitt exhibition opens in Warsaw

An exhibition to see. Photographer Elliott Erwitt (85 years old, working with the legendary Magnum Photos agency since 1954) has personally selected 50 of his favourite images for display at Warsaw's Leica Gallery (ul. Mysia 3). Among the photos some of his trademark dog photos, some famous faces (Marilyn Monroe, Khrushchev and Nixon, Jackie Kennedy, Che Guevara), much humour; evocative landscapes and cityscapes from America and Europe from the late 1940s to modern times.

The exhibition's opening night drew an enormous and appreciative crowd of all ages (below), with a large showing of hipsters (some touting film cameras). If you missed it, this exhibition, Personal Best for Leica, is open to 11 March (Mon-Sat 10:00-23:00, Sun 12:00-18:00), admission free.

Below: a study in appreciation. Black and white photos in black frames with white mounts on white walls. Each photograph was absolutely flawless in its presentation - prints without any visible scratches, dust specks or blemishes. The darkroom work complements that of the photographer.

Below: Erwitt's Che Guevara comes across as a vain poseur, basking in the light of his self-image. No doubt Guevara was delighted by it.

A digression. Note the three people in the foreground; all are using mobile devices - to communicate or to photograph with. Today, we can all be Erwitts; two billion (at least) mobile phones with built-in cameras are in use around the world. What mobile-phone snappers lack in skill and lens quality, they make up for in ubiquity. Yesterday's meteorite over Chelyabinsk, for example, was caught on camera by thousands, as well as by CCTV and dashboard cameras (a very Russian phenomenon).

Below: my favourite image from the exhibition - steam train, Wyoming, 1954. Exactly my time, my place. Erwitt's photos of Wyoming and North Carolina were for me the stars of the show.

A word about Leica, host of the exhibition. My first proper camera was a Leica (an M2, before that I had a pre-war Leica IIIb). I used a Leica rangefinder as my principal camera from a quarter of a century (1982-2007). What a brand. What associations. Yet today - lost. The sense of a digital camera costing $7,000 (body only) that comes with lenses that neither autofocus nor have vibration reduction (for several thousand additional dollars) is lost on me. Only a purist, a show-off or obsessive could consider such a purchase - especially since each successive digital Leica rangefinder only shows to highlight the shortcomings of its predecessor. A Nikon D3200 does an admirable job for a twentieth of the price. (If you are a Leica fan thinking of leaving a rude comment here - do you want to buy one of my old Leicas? I have an M2, M3 and M6 I want to get rid of, with 21, 35 and two 50mm lenses...)

A final photo digression. It would be good to see vibration reduction/image stabilisation technology in use on fast (f2 and faster) prime lenses. Manufacturers have ignored this - it would give photographers a good reason to update their prime lens fleet.

This time last year:
The first heavy snow of winter

This time two year:
God's Dwelling Place - a short story

This time three years ago:
Beat this for a snowy winter!

This time four years ago:
Poland's most popular outergarments

This time five years ago:
The Frost Gods return

Photography: the Law of Diminishing Returns disappears up its own fundament

At first, many assumed it was an early April Fool's joke. Leica - that most iconic brand name in photography - is bringing out a digital camera that only takes black-and-white photographs. The Leica M Monochrom, announced last week, is the latest in a long series of rangefinder cameras, starting with the M3, which appeared nearly six decades ago. The M8 was the first of the series to go digital (it was not a success); it was replaced by the M9, which, with its full-size sensor was more warmly received. And now, before the M10 hits the streets sometime later this year, the M Monochrom (18 megapixel sensor) has come out, probably the ultimate in photographic poseurdom.

The idea of paying $8,000 for a camera body that can only take b&w images is frankly absurd. To actually get some photos, you also need a lens. And Leica has launched a new one, the Leica APO-Summicron-M 50mm f2 ASPH., for a mere $7,195. So then. A camera that takes b&w pictures with a lens that's neither autofocus nor has image stabilisation (or vibration reduction) and offering sensitivity no better than 320 ISO (!) and costing over fifteen thousand bucks. That's €12,000 or £9,500 or 52,000 zlotys (at the current absurd exchange rate - £1=5.53PLN - buy zlotys and make a fortune as it bounces strongly back*).

So - for more than the price of a small family car, a ridiculous camera.

Ridiculous? Are the images 21 times better than those created with a $700 Nikon D3200 with a 24 megapixel sensor and 18-55mm f3.5 autofocus zoom lens with vibration reduction? One thing's certain - it's far easier to take a technically good photo with the cheapest Nikon DSLR than with the Leica.

Ridiculous? Leica cameras are worn to show off to those - and only those - who know. Those who don't have no idea. Before going digital, I'd use my Leica M6, and before it, my M2 or M3 for street photography. People would go up to me saying things like "I used to have a Zorki (or FED or Kiev or some other old Soviet camera) just like that". Occasionally, a knowledgeable person would notice and say 'Ah! a Leica M6! Excellent camera!'.

However, if you are spotted with an M-Monochrom around your neck, the few people who are in the know will rightly mock you as a gullible poseur, the photographic equivalent of the hi-fi buff who spends $50 on a single cable-tie or $1,500 on one vacuum amplifier valve. "But you can see the difference!" the owner of the M-Monochrom will wail, just as the audiophile will claim to hear the difference between sound signals sent via a $7,500 cable and those sent via a $5 cable.

This is the law of diminishing return. Like for like, the images from an M-Monochrom may objectively be a wee bit better. Lens resolution, lack of aberrations, finer nuances in tonal gradation you can measure. Subjectively, the Leica's images may display some qualities that aesthetically can be considered more appealing by some. Yet - these differences are measured in fractions of a percent compared to the best professional cameras by Nikon or Canon that cost less than half the Leica's price.

If you are going to take Ansel Adams-type shots of Yosemite National Park and then blow them up to 3m by 2m, then maybe. Although an Ansel Adams-style 5"x4" view camera with traditional fine-grain film would give even greater tonal separation and edge detail. If you want to 'live the legend', buy a second hand Leica M3 with Summicron 50mm f2 (old-style) and some b&w film. You should be able to buy body and lens on eBay for less than $1,500 for a good example. Below: my own Leica M3, a classic camera if ever there was one.

Or if you want a high-quality digital camera and shoot b&w, either buy any high-quality digital camera and set the camera settings to b&w, or via Photoshop desaturate the resulting pics to obtain b&w. And DxO Film Pack digitally simulates the appearance of 13 different b&w films in the basic version, and another 13 films (including b&w infra-red) in the expert version.


Leica is losing its way, with the M-Monochrom or the limited-edition M9-P Edition Hermès camera for fifty thousand bucks. What it should do is to build and market a digital back that fits onto any M-series film camera. Replace the back wall with a full-size sensor, so the million or so M-series users around the world can choose whether to use their M1s, M2s, M3s, M4s, M6s or M7s with film or a digital cameras.

Leica is one of the world's most legendary brands. Many of the greatest images of the last century were taken on Leica cameras; war photography, street photography, fashion, news - the Leica recorded what was happening. As the century wore on, the 35mm single-lens reflex camera came to dominate in news photography, in particularly Nikon, and more recently, Canon. Leica has lost its way, it has painted itself into a nichy corner; its users are rich amateurs rather than professionals demanding the very best tools available on the market.

I have used Leicas for over a quarter of a century until the digital revolution made the old technology obsolescent for me. For me, for my style of photography, for what I use a camera, I shall stick to Nikon DSLRs; a new D3200 (24 megapixels) is on my 'to buy' list to take over from my D40 (6 megapixels) as my 'carry-at-all-times' camera. In the meanwhile, Leica is either selling badge-engineered Panasonic Lumixes (at a 40% price premium), or high-end stuff that's drifting off into the absurd. The legend is losing its lustre.

* My instinct was right; three hours after writing these words, the pound has scrubbed off eight grosze against the zloty.

This time last year:
A night at the Filters (Museum Night 2011)

This time two years ago:
Warsaw's Museum Night

This time three years ago:
Exploring my anomalous memory events

The X100 philosophy

So then - here it is. The Fujifilm Finepix X100, probably the most raved-about camera of last year. What makes it so special? Its design philosophy, its inspiration, reaches back over half a century to what was one of the very greatest (if not the greatest) camera ever made, the Leica M3 (in production between 1954 and 1966).

In terms of visual comparison, here's the X100 (below)...

...and below, my well-loved Leica M3 from 1959, unused since I made the switch to digital photography five years ago. Both cameras in the same scale (see checked cloth background as reference).

Although Leica continues to manufacture M-series camera in film and digital versions (the M7 and M9 respectively), they are so mind-blowingly expensive as to put them out of reach of all but the wealthiest photographer, with the price of an M9 body (lenses have to be bought separately) costing over 24,000 złotys here, £5,000 in the UK, €6,000 in Germany, $8,000 in the US.

For those who know what Leica photography can offer, the X100 is a capable substitute at one-sixth of the price. It has a 12.2 megapixel sensor and a fixed 23mm f2 lens (the equivalent of 32mm on a full-frame camera).

Above all, the rangefinder camera is discreet, unobtrusive and quiet. It does not bring attention to the photographer the way a fully-featured single lens reflex does. So for street photography, the inconspicuous rangefinder is king. Rangefinder cameras are good for people, architecture and landscapes, no good for wildlife, aviation or anything calling for long lenses.

The X100 brings autofocus to the game (the M9 is still manually focused). Now, maybe my digital Nikons have made me lazy, but I've got used to letting the camera do the focusing for me. The X100 is also much lighter (and slightly smaller) than the Leica Ms. It weighs 440g, compared to 570g for my M3 with 35mm f2 lens, while the digital M9 body with that same (manual focus) lens would weigh over three-quarters of a kilo - which gets a bit much after a day around the neck.

However, the Leicas feel more robust. My M3 is now 53 years old and as sturdy as it was the day it left the factory. I wonder whether how many X100s will still be around in 2065...

My main gripe with the X100 is the lack of lens filter. Without a UV or Skylight filter, the lens is naked and vulnerable. On a camera with a fixed lens, it means that if you scratch the lens, the whole camera is useless. Now, Fuji make a filter mount adapter, but it is expensive (159 złotys/£30), non-standard and near-impossible to come by in Warsaw shops. You cannot simply screw in a standard 49mm filter into a threaded mount around the outside of the lens. There are hacks, involving removing the lens front trim ring, screwing in a 49mm filter backwards with the glass removed, then a second 49mm filter on top of that one, then replace the trim ring. There's the risk that if the filter rings are too narrow, the lens will jam against the filter glass when focused out. (Read about it here.)

Next gripe - the shutter button (which, incidentally, features a screw thread for a release cable - nice touch!). It is not positive enough. On my first outings with the camera, I found myself thinking I'd taken a picture (camera discretely round neck, not at eye-level) and discovering I hadn't. Not possible on a Leica.

Cameras commonly known as 'point-and-shoot' should be called 'point-and-wait-and-shoot'. DSLRs' greatest advantage over compact cameras is that they respond instantaneously. Now, the X100 is not quite there when it comes to that instant and direct feel of a single-lens reflex. There are electronic sounds that can come to your aid, confirming that a shot has been taken - but they rather give the game away. Because the X100 has a leaf shutter (rather than the Leica's focal plane horizontal shutter), you have to listen hard for any sound - a whir-whir of the autofocus and a near-silent 'sst' as the exposure is made. This is exactly what's wanted in street photography - if only the shutter offered more positive confirmation that a photo has being taken via your fingertip.

To give you an idea of lens sharpness - here's a wide shot of one of my bookshelves, taken on the X100...

...and a four-times magnification from it from the centre of the above photo (below). Hand-held, 1/20th sec, f2 (lens wide open), 800 ISO. Click to enlarge.

So - do I buy the X100 at a good price - or wait until Nikon's D3200 comes out? More tomorrow... The X100's outstanding hybrid viewfinder, its poor battery, complicated menu, lovely controls...

This time last year:
Reason vs. Emotion

This time two years ago:
The civilisational effects of frequent flying

This time three years ago:
A week into Lent