Bought a brand new Leica M6 and a Summilux 35 mm 1.4 in 1996. Expensive........still incredible and love it. Couldn't really afford it at that time but did it. It has served me wonderfully ever since. Sometimes you can't afford NOT TO BUY QUALITY........A couple of times I send it to service at Leica - also expensive.......Service because of african dust and just to be sure everything was working right and it wouldn't be ruined by use. Just to make it last forever. Think it will. You have a good point buying an old one. People just have to check it out personally.
They didn't choose to make a film camera again, they never stopped making film cameras. But the M6 is worth the hype, along with the Nikon F3, I think it's best 35mm camera to date. Although the image quality isn't at all up to the M6 body, but the leica lenses.
Now that we have the latest film camera, we just need to have film manufacturers to make more film so it doesn't cost 5X what it cost years ago per roll!!!
For 30 years I was working in dark rooms, so I would have no problems to enter the analog film world again. You'll get the best results with an M6 with a Summilux 50 or maybe 35 mm. 45 years ago I traveled the USA just with a 50 and a 24 lens for my Minolta SRT-101. Today I'm on Leica M-P 240 and three M lenses: 50, 24 and 90. More isn' needed for my press photography. Keep on rolling!
really appreciate you bringing up the ability to actually unlock a leica's lens potential by how you scan a 35mm. This is 100% so real and true. People shoot 35mm and wonder how it doesn't look like Joe Greer's leica shots that almost look digital because theyre so clean. You really do need access to a great lab or equipment for 35mm to pay off if you like that clean look.
I've never owned Leica gear and made a loss on ownership. Of course, that's assuming you will sell your gear at one point. I've told myself not to sell my Leica gear anymore after having to rebuy a few items due to regret :)
Thanks for the video. Over the decades, I have owned and used Canon, Minolta, Contax, Fuji, and Argus rangefinder cameras. The Leica M6 is my personal favorite 35mm rangefinder camera. I shoot my M6 with the following lenses: 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss 90mm f/2 Leitz 21mm f/1.4 Leitz
@@salat I have a PrimeFilm XA for my 35mm film scanns and a v700. I have used Epson scanners for years including the 10000. Flatbed is fine but no way you will get as good results for 35mm with a flatbed than you will with a dedicated 35mm. Look how much it would cost you go get a old Nikon Coolscan. The only scanner that will top a dedicated 35mm scanner for 35mm is a Imacon or Drum scanner.
hard to see the difference on CZcams (between lenses I mean) but thank you for posting it.... You know the video compression and all... I'm sure the Leica is a better lens although the V is still making great optics!
I'm one of those old film photographers who are all too frugal and have always seen Leica as more of a collector's item rather than a proper camera. Don't get me wrong, they're great machines and much respect for all those who use them daily, I however would never spend $5k in camera gear to shoot 35mm film when the results of shooting on a Leica are no different than what you get with a good $500 Nikon/Canon/Olympus etc.
honestly out of all non-leica M mount lenses, the Zeiss ZM range are my favourite. You get Leica quality for around half the price. No hate on Voigtlander, they do great lenses. But the Zeiss range are optically identical (if not slightly superior in some cases) to Leica. Great video though, i look forward to more!
I have a zeiss 35 f2.8 biogon and i love that lens, it is sharp and have great contrast..but the new voigtlanders are just good if not better. I think the benefit is knowing there are many great M-mount lens out there that isn't just leica.
i like that you actually mentioned the limitation of the gear to actually bring out the quality of these lenses because i see so many people buying these beatiful leica lenses only so scan there film on a v600 and go like wow its so sharp.... its all in there heads and hardly anyone is seeing there gears true potential when it comes to film
Can anyone possibly explain me what Leica does better(except being investment luxury item) than any Nikon, Olympus SLR? Look at the FM2. Fraction of the price and 1/4000 of the second shutter speed.
@@killingspree5254 Not everyone likes rangefinders. Will give credit to the legendary status of their lenses. On the other hand there are a great Japanese lenses that got great following in SLR community.
*The best part is now there are three Leica M6s, all different price points, and prices that will remain stagnant* : -Leica M6 classic: $2k-3k -Leica M6 TTL: $3k-4k -Leica M6 2022: $5.2k Nice work, Leica. You made a huge difference in the film community 😂
something that I released but I might be wrong about, is that the rangefinder is not good for portrait photography and has blurry background, Is it right?
You may be right, but the M6 has a lot of electronics. Electronics and Leica don't go together. I am not talking about what can be found on the internet from other people. I know from experience. If the problem was too complicated for them, they simply returned the camera with a note that nothing can be done and that the warranty had expired. And they gave me a courtesy keyring with a red Leica disc. Their first digital models had to have the sensor replaced too often. Quickly, this became at your own expense. I now only have the MP, which is fully mechanical. It's up to me to make use of the suggestions of the light meter.
"Who know all the money is in digital" - that's the exact opposite of the market trends at the moment. Leica have re-released the M6 because of the tremendous boom in film photography over the past 5 years. Plus, they never stopped making film cameras, so it isn't that they have chosen to make one again after stopping.
i dig the video but an confused on quite a bit of this. First and foremost... is the title is M6: the best 35mm film camera ever... you could test the new m6 verse the new m-p or m-a. Are you speaking on the new version or the older versions vrs the new release versions? Also the loading of the camera? I guess I don't really know. Just slightly confused on the comparisons. Do you feel a leica lens has more of an impact to your image verse a leica body?
I agree! The Nikon F2 is my personal favorite camera. The Leica M6 is my personal favorite 35mm rangefinder camera. However, my 6x7cm and 6x9cm medium format film cameras produce higher quality images than my F2 or my M6.
Actually You have right. I bought Leica to use Leica Lens. Summicron 50 right now i own and heh.... 3 years of save cash. When People buy some cheeper alternatives why they go Leica?
you should sell that voigtlander 28mm version 1 and get the version 2...it is sharper than leica 28mm equivalent. and only at $900US brand new for a black paint brass version.
Geez. The MP is superior in so many aspects. Brass build, not zinc. Better internal parts for critical mechanics. A brass top plate without these ridiculous plastic pieces which can cause light leaks. A premium viewfinder not as easily prone to reflections and flares as with the M6. A more reliable light meter. There is a reason they retired the original classic M6 in 2002 and replaced it with the premium MP and MA. And the new "M6" has nothing in common with the original M6 other than the design language. All the parts are either identical to the MP - and most noteworthy: the new brass top plate is a completely new design, it only shares design language with the original M6. When you're buying a new M6 today, you are buying an MP at a $500 discount in exchange for having to tolerate a red dot on you camera.
One cannot simply pick up a Leica and lens and feel, wow! Like placing me, a gypsy with camera, in your studio! Upside down, laterally reversed images on a dark screen. Use of lighting extrvaganza, that woull have me baffled. A Leica when you need it, is perfect! It rests softly agains your cheek, one holds it a delicate manner, the finder, simple, plain. Yup 2 reddots. Not Battle Star Gallactica. Or Vegas neon strip. Use one, an older one, no meter, a 50mm or 35mm, for a year, when to find your way, to the door! Enjoy. Use a good lab. Enjoy. and Enjoy, enjoy! Liked your opinion.!
The best camera is the M3…. Or MA… they are the essential camera. The M6, MP…M7… is too … well, they are nice, but not pure mechanical. I am glad there is a renewed interest in film but challenge yourself n find film photography without a light meter. Learn light… learn that skill
It is rather vulgar thinking the Leica is a perfect camera for street photograhy. The Leica M is a perfect camera for close-up, macro, repro and tele shots. Tele lenses of 1000 mm can be mounted onall Leica bodies. In the hot shoe a spirit level can be mounted. It is blasphemy to scan a Leica negative and making a digital print of it. There are plenty cameras of the same or higher quality like Leica: Linhof, Sinar, Hasselblad etc.
You don't know what a hot shoe is obviously. The shutter in the camera triggers the flash - regardless if the flash meters with TTL or not. The shoe is hot because it triggers the flash. You do not need a sync cable on the MP, MA or new M6, they all have a hot shoe.
@@weisserth It is not a hot shoe. I have the MP and use flash a lot. If it was a hot shoe it would automatically set the flash, this one do not, you have to set the flash value manually, hence it is a cold shoe. The Leica M6 TTL has a hot shoe.
It’s a hotshoe. It will electronically fire a ‘speedlight’ style flash through the little contact on the shoe. If it were a cold shoe (like an M1/2/3) then you’d need a sync cable to fire a mounted flash.
@@larsj5964 It's a hotshoe LOL. It's electrical, so it's a hot shoe. A cold shoe essentially does fuck all except have something attach to it. You need to learn the basics of equipment mate.
Unless you spend a lot of time in a darkroom and are skilled at printing, or find a skilled developer and printer - difficult to find now? I don't see the point in film photography. By scanning you are just adding another layer of degradation to the image, no matter what the camera. I won't go back from digital because the quality of my images wouldn't be as good and I know many photographers (who came from the film age) who agree Sorry
That's fair enough! :) Without going too deep into the ins and outs of film vs digital I'd say that I personally just have more fun using film cameras, I like the mechanical aspect of it and I feel i'm a lot more considerate when i take photos knowing I have the limitations of a roll of film. I'm in no way anti-digital though, one of my favourite cameras is my Fuji X100V and that gives me alot of the hands on fun I get from film cameras (in its design and colour science) with all the benefits from digital. I'm sure you'll hear different opinions all over the internet but I think you make a very fair point that many people would also agree with. Thanks for watching my video and leaving a comment :)
Even when scanned.. the quality’s of film still come through…I agree that maybe the very latest super lens from Leica May well be wasted on film and scanning.. but I much prefer my old Leica R elmarits …
Thanks for all your replies and I love watching film videos. The patience and attention to detail is fantastic However for me at my age, digital works and is more convenient but to all you film guys, keep up the good work 📷
Depends. You ever heard about slide film? Together with a Leica projector and lenses you will achieve colors and resolution hard to achieve even with an 8k digital projector.
This discussion is pointless unless you set a reference standard by defining "best". The original reason to buy a Leica body was to use a Leica lens, as Leitz aggressively defended its exclusive rights under its patents to make bodies and lenses using the "M-mount". When the patents lapsed, others started making lenses and bodies using the Leica M-mount system, some excellent, even Leitz competitive, quality. Others, not so much. If you want the absolutely best build, you buy a Leica, even if it is unnecessarily crippled by one of the more fussy and foolish film loading systems put on a camera in the last 70 years. If you want to shoot the same images/quality with Leica (or other) lenses, you can buy a Cosina/Voigtlander body, or a Rollei or Zeiss body, which are made by Cosina by slightly modifying their Bessa models. Apart from the snob appeal, there is little left to recommend a Leica. As for the justifiably praised Leica lenses, their hugely higher cost than very similar lenses from Cosina and others cannot be justified by anyone scanning their film to make digital image files, since the scanners and DSLR-photo copy methods have no way of capturing any of the subtle differences between Leica lenses and most of Non-Leica lenses. So IMO, it all comes down to 20% of price for imaging quality and 80% for snob appeal.
Bought a brand new Leica M6 and a Summilux 35 mm 1.4 in 1996. Expensive........still incredible and love it. Couldn't really afford it at that time but did it. It has served me wonderfully ever since. Sometimes you can't afford NOT TO BUY QUALITY........A couple of times I send it to service at Leica - also expensive.......Service because of african dust and just to be sure everything was working right and it wouldn't be ruined by use. Just to make it last forever. Think it will.
You have a good point buying an old one. People just have to check it out personally.
They didn't choose to make a film camera again, they never stopped making film cameras. But the M6 is worth the hype, along with the Nikon F3, I think it's best 35mm camera to date. Although the image quality isn't at all up to the M6 body, but the leica lenses.
Now that we have the latest film camera, we just need to have film manufacturers to make more film so it doesn't cost 5X what it cost years ago per roll!!!
For 30 years I was working in dark rooms, so I would have no problems to enter the analog film world again. You'll get the best results with an M6 with a Summilux 50 or maybe 35 mm. 45 years ago I traveled the USA just with a 50 and a 24 lens for my Minolta SRT-101. Today I'm on Leica M-P 240 and three M lenses: 50, 24 and 90. More isn' needed for my press photography. Keep on rolling!
What about video recording equipment?
The colors are so beautiful.
The picture quality is good too.
thank you for sharing! Pratical information without too much details.Btw, the M6 + voigtlander 28 + Ilford 400 setting is fire.
really appreciate you bringing up the ability to actually unlock a leica's lens potential by how you scan a 35mm. This is 100% so real and true. People shoot 35mm and wonder how it doesn't look like Joe Greer's leica shots that almost look digital because theyre so clean. You really do need access to a great lab or equipment for 35mm to pay off if you like that clean look.
I've never owned Leica gear and made a loss on ownership. Of course, that's assuming you will sell your gear at one point. I've told myself not to sell my Leica gear anymore after having to rebuy a few items due to regret :)
Thanks for the video.
Over the decades, I have owned and used Canon, Minolta, Contax, Fuji, and Argus rangefinder cameras. The Leica M6 is my personal favorite 35mm rangefinder camera.
I shoot my M6 with the following lenses:
35mm f/1.4 Zeiss
90mm f/2 Leitz
21mm f/1.4 Leitz
My favorite rangefinder is the Canon VT De luxe w/ Voightlander 21mm f4 Color Skopar ltm MC
don't scan 35mm with a flatbed
Look up 'Film scanner ranking and scanner comparison" - I'd rather go with that Epson flatbed than an el cheapo Plustek..
@@salat I have a PrimeFilm XA for my 35mm film scanns and a v700. I have used Epson scanners for years including the 10000. Flatbed is fine but no way you will get as good results for 35mm with a flatbed than you will with a dedicated 35mm. Look how much it would cost you go get a old Nikon Coolscan. The only scanner that will top a dedicated 35mm scanner for 35mm is a Imacon or Drum scanner.
Print the contact sheet In a darkroom then scan it… you are both dead…😂
Appreciate the subtitles ❤
hard to see the difference on CZcams (between lenses I mean) but thank you for posting it.... You know the video compression and all... I'm sure the Leica is a better lens although the V is still making great optics!
picked mine up from my leica store in my city a few days ago!!
love your comments! thanks for the great video.
1:18 No, original M6 made with zinc alloy top and brass bottom.
My mistake, thank you for the correction!
I'm one of those old film photographers who are all too frugal and have always seen Leica as more of a collector's item rather than a proper camera. Don't get me wrong, they're great machines and much respect for all those who use them daily, I however would never spend $5k in camera gear to shoot 35mm film when the results of shooting on a Leica are no different than what you get with a good $500 Nikon/Canon/Olympus etc.
I really like leica camera, but it's too expensive for me 😅
honestly out of all non-leica M mount lenses, the Zeiss ZM range are my favourite. You get Leica quality for around half the price. No hate on Voigtlander, they do great lenses. But the Zeiss range are optically identical (if not slightly superior in some cases) to Leica. Great video though, i look forward to more!
I have a zeiss 35 f2.8 biogon and i love that lens, it is sharp and have great contrast..but the new voigtlanders are just good if not better. I think the benefit is knowing there are many great M-mount lens out there that isn't just leica.
i like that you actually mentioned the limitation of the gear to actually bring out the quality of these lenses because i see so many people buying these beatiful leica lenses only so scan there film on a v600 and go like wow its so sharp.... its all in there heads and hardly anyone is seeing there gears true potential when it comes to film
just buy a Plustek lol
and not use a flatbed
Can anyone possibly explain me what Leica does better(except being investment luxury item) than any Nikon, Olympus SLR? Look at the FM2. Fraction of the price and 1/4000 of the second shutter speed.
@@kamilpotato3764 well, better lenses and is a rangefinder
@@killingspree5254 Not everyone likes rangefinders. Will give credit to the legendary status of their lenses. On the other hand there are a great Japanese lenses that got great following in SLR community.
The quality of good lenses in the analog times was uncovered with slide film and projection. Not by printing film. And it is the same today.
Great video ‼️
*The best part is now there are three Leica M6s, all different price points, and prices that will remain stagnant* :
-Leica M6 classic: $2k-3k
-Leica M6 TTL: $3k-4k
-Leica M6 2022: $5.2k
Nice work, Leica. You made a huge difference in the film community 😂
If I had the money, if definitely pull the trigger on one of these. Not a new one, a second hand older model.
something that I released but I might be wrong about, is that the rangefinder is not good for portrait photography and has blurry background, Is it right?
You may be right, but the M6 has a lot of electronics. Electronics and Leica don't go together. I am not talking about what can be found on the internet from other people. I know from experience. If the problem was too complicated for them, they simply returned the camera with a note that nothing can be done and that the warranty had expired. And they gave me a courtesy keyring with a red Leica disc. Their first digital models had to have the sensor replaced too often. Quickly, this became at your own expense. I now only have the MP, which is fully mechanical. It's up to me to make use of the suggestions of the light meter.
Just covers the rangefinder 1:48 hehe.. now that’s some skill
"Who know all the money is in digital" - that's the exact opposite of the market trends at the moment. Leica have re-released the M6 because of the tremendous boom in film photography over the past 5 years. Plus, they never stopped making film cameras, so it isn't that they have chosen to make one again after stopping.
i dig the video but an confused on quite a bit of this. First and foremost... is the title is M6: the best 35mm film camera ever... you could test the new m6 verse the new m-p or m-a. Are you speaking on the new version or the older versions vrs the new release versions? Also the loading of the camera? I guess I don't really know. Just slightly confused on the comparisons. Do you feel a leica lens has more of an impact to your image verse a leica body?
IMHO, the best 35mm film camera ever for the money is the Nikon F2, hands down.
I agree! The Nikon F2 is my personal favorite camera.
The Leica M6 is my personal favorite 35mm rangefinder camera.
However, my 6x7cm and 6x9cm medium format film cameras produce higher quality images than my F2 or my M6.
I don't have interest in purchasing leica cameras, but I am interested in the cameras themselves and the history behind them.
Actually You have right. I bought Leica to use Leica Lens. Summicron 50 right now i own and heh.... 3 years of save cash. When People buy some cheeper alternatives why they go Leica?
If you've ever owned an M6 then you know it is worth the hype.
you should sell that voigtlander 28mm version 1 and get the version 2...it is sharper than leica 28mm equivalent. and only at $900US brand new for a black paint brass version.
Geez.
The MP is superior in so many aspects.
Brass build, not zinc. Better internal parts for critical mechanics.
A brass top plate without these ridiculous plastic pieces which can cause light leaks.
A premium viewfinder not as easily prone to reflections and flares as with the M6.
A more reliable light meter.
There is a reason they retired the original classic M6 in 2002 and replaced it with the premium MP and MA.
And the new "M6" has nothing in common with the original M6 other than the design language. All the parts are either identical to the MP - and most noteworthy: the new brass top plate is a completely new design, it only shares design language with the original M6.
When you're buying a new M6 today, you are buying an MP at a $500 discount in exchange for having to tolerate a red dot on you camera.
The new M6 is brass and has the modernised finder.
@@mynewcolour I think that's his point. This new M6 is not really an M6 at all. It's an MP with a different top plate.
@@mattah I see. I thought the op was referring to the new M6.
@@mynewcolour that finder and light meter came from the MP parts bin
HIi Can you buy 35mm for Leika camera anywhere ?
If you can afford it, great. But it's like buying a Bugatti Veyron to go shopping for groceries.
One cannot simply pick up a Leica and lens and feel, wow! Like placing me, a gypsy with camera, in your studio! Upside down, laterally reversed images on a dark screen. Use of lighting extrvaganza, that woull have me baffled. A Leica when you need it, is perfect! It rests softly agains your cheek, one holds it a delicate manner, the finder, simple, plain. Yup 2 reddots. Not Battle Star Gallactica. Or Vegas neon strip. Use one, an older one, no meter, a 50mm or 35mm, for a year, when to find your way, to the door! Enjoy. Use a good lab. Enjoy. and Enjoy, enjoy! Liked your opinion.!
1) MP>M6
2) Canon VT Deluxe > Leica M6
3) Nikon F > Leica M6
What we need is films and labs.
Voigtländer is made in Asia ; not in Germany.
M3 is the best Leica ever
Is your house full of portraits of yourself? Is that what Leica owners are like?
The photos on my walls are all of my beautiful friends. None of them are photos of me, but thank you, I'll take the compliment 😉
The best camera is the M3…. Or MA… they are the essential camera. The M6, MP…M7… is too … well, they are nice, but not pure mechanical. I am glad there is a renewed interest in film but challenge yourself n find film photography without a light meter. Learn light… learn that skill
okay, then what is the m2 and m4, m4-2 m4-p?
Plustek 8200 not too expensive way better than flatbed scanner.
It's worse than his Epson, dude..
It is rather vulgar thinking the Leica is a perfect camera for street photograhy.
The Leica M is a perfect camera for close-up, macro, repro and tele shots.
Tele lenses of 1000 mm can be mounted onall Leica bodies.
In the hot shoe a spirit level can be mounted.
It is blasphemy to scan a Leica negative and making a digital print of it.
There are plenty cameras of the same or higher quality like Leica:
Linhof, Sinar, Hasselblad etc.
She looks familiar..
The 🔌
Mp .. best current Leica .. then toss up between MA and new M6…
M-A >M2>M4>M3
I would say the Olympus om1n is a lot better
65E66
Not a hot shoe on this camera, it has what is called a cold shoe, not for TTL flash.
You don't know what a hot shoe is obviously. The shutter in the camera triggers the flash - regardless if the flash meters with TTL or not. The shoe is hot because it triggers the flash. You do not need a sync cable on the MP, MA or new M6, they all have a hot shoe.
@@weisserth It is not a hot shoe. I have the MP and use flash a lot. If it was a hot shoe it would automatically set the flash, this one do not, you have to set the flash value manually, hence it is a cold shoe. The Leica M6 TTL has a hot shoe.
It’s a hotshoe. It will electronically fire a ‘speedlight’ style flash through the little contact on the shoe.
If it were a cold shoe (like an M1/2/3) then you’d need a sync cable to fire a mounted flash.
@@larsj5964 It's a hotshoe LOL. It's electrical, so it's a hot shoe. A cold shoe essentially does fuck all except have something attach to it. You need to learn the basics of equipment mate.
you realize leica was still making film cameras before this newest m6?
Unless you spend a lot of time in a darkroom and are skilled at printing, or find a skilled developer and printer - difficult to find now?
I don't see the point in film photography. By scanning you are just adding another layer of degradation to the image, no matter what the camera.
I won't go back from digital because the quality of my images wouldn't be as good and I know many photographers (who came from the film age) who agree
Sorry
That's fair enough! :) Without going too deep into the ins and outs of film vs digital I'd say that I personally just have more fun using film cameras, I like the mechanical aspect of it and I feel i'm a lot more considerate when i take photos knowing I have the limitations of a roll of film.
I'm in no way anti-digital though, one of my favourite cameras is my Fuji X100V and that gives me alot of the hands on fun I get from film cameras (in its design and colour science) with all the benefits from digital.
I'm sure you'll hear different opinions all over the internet but I think you make a very fair point that many people would also agree with.
Thanks for watching my video and leaving a comment :)
the grain is beatiful tho
Even when scanned.. the quality’s of film still come through…I agree that maybe the very latest super lens from Leica May well be wasted on film and scanning.. but I much prefer my old Leica R elmarits …
Thanks for all your replies and I love watching film videos. The patience and attention to detail is fantastic
However for me at my age, digital works and is more convenient but to all you film guys, keep up the good work 📷
Depends. You ever heard about slide film? Together with a Leica projector and lenses you will achieve colors and resolution hard to achieve even with an 8k digital projector.
This discussion is pointless unless you set a reference standard by defining "best". The original reason to buy a Leica body was to use a Leica lens, as Leitz aggressively defended its exclusive rights under its patents to make bodies and lenses using the "M-mount". When the patents lapsed, others started making lenses and bodies using the Leica M-mount system, some excellent, even Leitz competitive, quality. Others, not so much. If you want the absolutely best build, you buy a Leica, even if it is unnecessarily crippled by one of the more fussy and foolish film loading systems put on a camera in the last 70 years. If you want to shoot the same images/quality with Leica (or other) lenses, you can buy a Cosina/Voigtlander body, or a Rollei or Zeiss body, which are made by Cosina by slightly modifying their Bessa models. Apart from the snob appeal, there is little left to recommend a Leica. As for the justifiably praised Leica lenses, their hugely higher cost than very similar lenses from Cosina and others cannot be justified by anyone scanning their film to make digital image files, since the scanners and DSLR-photo copy methods have no way of capturing any of the subtle differences between Leica lenses and most of Non-Leica lenses. So IMO, it all comes down to 20% of price for imaging quality and 80% for snob appeal.
Easiest cameras to load,EVER!
LEICA - HAS NEVER BEEN WORTH THE HYPE - THE M9 WAS THE WORST....
I think the fm2 is much more affordable option, with better specs. Leica did a great job on this camera though.