Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I also don't believe there's any unique skill in focusing a rangefinder. Once you understand how they work they're easier to focus than an SLR IMO.
FrankS
Registered User
Totally disagree. Everyone has their own road.
(unfortunately I think you were being serious. Hope I'm wrong though.)
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I'm seriously considering getting another M9 while I can get a new one, even if the sensor will be corroded by gamma rays from outer space before I need to use it. I've long been hoping for a lower tech digital M, which it looks like won;t be coming. FF sensor, no motor, no LCD, a few dials to set ISO and exposure compensation if it needs to have AUTO shutter. Let the camera read my 6-bit lenses and be able to deal with a non-coded lens. Frameline selector please. CMOS, CCD I don't much care. The M9 sensor does most everything I need besides a low enough ISO. Hardly ever shoot over 800 or 1000- never do with film either. I like my ISO 20 Rollei Ortho and my ISO 40 PanF+ just fine. I'd been longing for an MP-D, but would happily settle for an M7-D. I'd buy two of them.
But, cameras are a product, and products rarely manage to stay the same any more. Leica is pretty unique in having kept so much the same for so long. Look at the F and the F5, and now the D4 or 5 or whatever they're up to now. The M still has an optical VF - something I don't see lasting terribly long now that the EVF is there. More clamoring for more info in the VF, look at a D4 - how that became 'normal' I can't imagine. Even the F4 was busy, tho not cluttered. I've not shot a real video camera in decades, I can only imagine how difficult it is to see through the info displayed in one of those now.
I'm not terribly concerned about being passed by the fast car. I have tools that do exactly what I need, more than I need in some cases. I can make prints as big as I want without much trouble. Assuming the digital bodies last I'll be using them as long as I can, till the DNG file format is overtaken by some faster better file and the computers can't read a DNG. I used to say I'd start coating glass plates if film went away, now I kinda doubt it. When push comes to shove I'll move to the M of the moment if I still need a digital RF.
I still shoot lots of film, heck I teach film, and am already far behind the curve of understanding how all these digital camera features are helpful. They change so fast keeping up is almost a full time job. Focus peaking? I've seen it, tried it out with a 35/2 v4 on a Ricoh something or other with the M mount. Seems kinda silly. ISO 264,000? really? No thanks. I'm old enough to remember when it was dark at night, and that meant you couldn't see things. That was part of life. But then we rode bikes without helmets and knee/elbow pads and cups, had cars without seat belts, ate food without genetics. And still thought we had it all.
But, cameras are a product, and products rarely manage to stay the same any more. Leica is pretty unique in having kept so much the same for so long. Look at the F and the F5, and now the D4 or 5 or whatever they're up to now. The M still has an optical VF - something I don't see lasting terribly long now that the EVF is there. More clamoring for more info in the VF, look at a D4 - how that became 'normal' I can't imagine. Even the F4 was busy, tho not cluttered. I've not shot a real video camera in decades, I can only imagine how difficult it is to see through the info displayed in one of those now.
I'm not terribly concerned about being passed by the fast car. I have tools that do exactly what I need, more than I need in some cases. I can make prints as big as I want without much trouble. Assuming the digital bodies last I'll be using them as long as I can, till the DNG file format is overtaken by some faster better file and the computers can't read a DNG. I used to say I'd start coating glass plates if film went away, now I kinda doubt it. When push comes to shove I'll move to the M of the moment if I still need a digital RF.
I still shoot lots of film, heck I teach film, and am already far behind the curve of understanding how all these digital camera features are helpful. They change so fast keeping up is almost a full time job. Focus peaking? I've seen it, tried it out with a 35/2 v4 on a Ricoh something or other with the M mount. Seems kinda silly. ISO 264,000? really? No thanks. I'm old enough to remember when it was dark at night, and that meant you couldn't see things. That was part of life. But then we rode bikes without helmets and knee/elbow pads and cups, had cars without seat belts, ate food without genetics. And still thought we had it all.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Can't do that mate, Jewish and all.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
kshapero
South Florida Man
Notice my new avatar?Whoops!
I forgot.
boomguy57
Well-known
Once upon a time Leica was the new boy, the upstart, and made 35mm cameras. They sacrificed the larger format film for portability. The old school, Ansel Adams-types, probably thumbed their noses in disgust and essentially said the same thing you said, and the OP before that.
Now Leica is the old dog trying to catch up to what the overwhelming majority of the market wants. I love shooting film RFs (which is why I started here initially) but just about everyone my age wants to shoot digital. The market responds appropriately; Leica is way behind the curve so far. To most, film is a curiosity, and something to experiment with, but that's all. Now, RFF can be a bit of an echo chamber, where a very small group of people--and even a core group inside of that--posts about the "good old days" of film, without all this new-fangled digital rubbish. Live view? Pah! Focus peaking? You must be joking!
Basically, this isn't a fork in the road. Those who love photography will make images by any means necessary, as some in this thread have already expressed. Those who steadfastly refuse certainly have that right, but most of those old dogs don't want to learn new tricks. There's nothing wrong with that.
Shooting film or digital isn't a moral issue. It's just photography.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
rbsinto
Well-known
Eventually you will be an old timey film guy or superfragilistic digital guy. All discussions will be one or the other. The new Leica M (10) confirms it. A film guy will be left in the dust by phrases now common with digital guys like, focus peaking, live view, etc. Sure I know this stuff has been around for awhile but film guys (read Leica guys) always snubbed their nose at it. But now Leica has finally embraced the technology. The earlier digital Leica M's were really just film guy cameras that saved an exposure to an SD card instead of a film canister, but no more. Big question; will this forum split apart into two or can we all coexist even though our terminology will eventually be unknown to each other? Oh at least one thing still holds us together: Glass!!
Those of you who know me, know that I am mostly just waxing away but occasionally I can hit a futuristic nerve.
Ciao all.
Akiva,
Yes you are just waxing away, and I think you've finally reached the stage where you're suffering from Yellow Waxy Build-up.
Why would you even bother worrying about stuff like this anyway?
Buy and shoot with what you like and don't worry about the rest. It will all sort itself out.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Youth! Turf! Vacate!
paulfish4570
Veteran
it's the pictures, man!
icebear
Veteran
Hi there fstops,
usually I tend to disagree with you but here you nailed it +1
+2 for this short answer to the OP.it's the pictures, man!
Hi Akiva,
as RFF is an online community and photo sharing is mostly done by upload of files and not by sending an actual print by snail mail (other then special projects), the core of the matter of photography easily gets "out of focus", the photo itself.
Does it really matter what camera someone used to get a great shot? If he was at the right time at the right place and knew how to operate his tool, he got a shot.
It does NOT matter what camera he used unless gearheads and pixel peepers are checking the exif data and even then the message of the shot does not depend on this. Film or digital ? It only matters that you like the tool you use and know how to work with it.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
These days manual focus is pretty dang retro. I'd be surprised if many folks who couldn't use an M9 will jump on the M just because they can now use focus peaking. Similar sentiments were heard when the M8.2 had snapshot mode, when the M8 delivered digital and when the M7 got AE...
It's a camera. Why care how many people use the same one you or I do?
BobYIL
Well-known
Hi Akiva,
Leave the fork and road aside, go and check the 100 years old pictures in the below link and then start thinking of how many of us are able to reach the tonality and quality there even with the latest digital cameras, if the image quality is the greatest concern:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=123959
Leave the fork and road aside, go and check the 100 years old pictures in the below link and then start thinking of how many of us are able to reach the tonality and quality there even with the latest digital cameras, if the image quality is the greatest concern:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=123959
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Here we all type with a keyboard (some on a screen), yet the pencil is not dead.
Digital cameras are all the rage, yet film cameras live on.
Digital cameras are all the rage, yet film cameras live on.
froyd
Veteran
Well, that's exactly it. The camera should not matter to viewers of the final image, but it *may* matter to the photographer.
I find the members of RFF fall somewhere along the spectrum of "the camera is just a tool" and Gollum's "My Precious".
I tend to fall in the latter camp because for me photogarphy it's a hobby. Nobody is paying me to "get the shot". I take photographs for my own enjoyment and using a camera I like is a major part of that experience. Kinda like getting from A to B in a motorcycle or an SUV. both work and some would prefer one over the other.
I would go as far as saying that I take better pictures with the cameras I like best. Clearly a better man would do just as well with a pinhole as with a D4, but I'm not that man.
WOW! thanks for reposting.
Turtle
Veteran
I'm a bit lost on this one. Leica has introduced a camera that answers the requests for change put forward by Leica M users. They have introduced some fairly basic additional features but the camera remains exactly like a M3-M9 in terms of basic function: optical viewfinder with CRF (albeit LED frame lines). Its pretty well the same size. Better screen should this matter to you, a CMOS sensor in lieu of CCD, longer battery life, weather sealing, but there is now a problem?
Do I have this wrong, but will the new M not operate almost exactly like the old M9 should you choose not to use video/focus peaking etc? Where on earth is the problem? its like me saying that I hate my Eos 5D II compared to my Eos 3 because it has video and other features! You don't have to use them if you dont want to. I don't even know how to use video on my 5D II. It operates the same as my Eos 3, or 1n for that matter. If I get the new M, I doubt I will ever use focus peaking in million years, but the better high ISO, yes please.
I think this is a great new camera by Leica, with the same for those who want the same, and more for those who want more, and all for less than the cost of the M9-P and, if you account for inflation, less than the original M9.
As for ease of use, if making it easy to use makes you feel insecure because 'anyone' might be able to pick one up and use it, there is a problem in your head not with this camera. Back in film days, there were always individuals who harped on endlessly about this or that technical feature of a camera using the lingo of those 'in the know', but it did not stop the rest of us remaining blissfully ignorant and just using the darned thing to take photos.
Do I have this wrong, but will the new M not operate almost exactly like the old M9 should you choose not to use video/focus peaking etc? Where on earth is the problem? its like me saying that I hate my Eos 5D II compared to my Eos 3 because it has video and other features! You don't have to use them if you dont want to. I don't even know how to use video on my 5D II. It operates the same as my Eos 3, or 1n for that matter. If I get the new M, I doubt I will ever use focus peaking in million years, but the better high ISO, yes please.
I think this is a great new camera by Leica, with the same for those who want the same, and more for those who want more, and all for less than the cost of the M9-P and, if you account for inflation, less than the original M9.
As for ease of use, if making it easy to use makes you feel insecure because 'anyone' might be able to pick one up and use it, there is a problem in your head not with this camera. Back in film days, there were always individuals who harped on endlessly about this or that technical feature of a camera using the lingo of those 'in the know', but it did not stop the rest of us remaining blissfully ignorant and just using the darned thing to take photos.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The problem is that there are people who consider some things to be bad simply if they're there, even if they never use or even see them. This is a kind of negative selectivity.
It's not constructive at all, but in the Leica userbase there seems to be a fair number of people who think that way, nevertheless.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Isn't that just re-stating the fact that an expensive, difficult-to-use camera bestows upon its user a little bit of distinction? And doesn't that imply the assertion that when the camera gets too easy to use we are in danger of losing this distinction and feeling a little less special?
Turtle
Veteran
Leicashot, do you take pride in being a camera operator or photographer, who aspires to see and make incredible images?
I cannot understand this because the easy operation of cameras has been open to the masses since the box brownie. I don't think Leica has added features to make the cameras easier to use, but they have added live view, which makes the camera better for certain applications (tho not mine). The Leica M can still be operated by setting ISO and then exposure via aperture and shutter can it not?
One's photos gain no extra credits by virtue of being produced with a 'difficult to use Leica'. Nobody cares. They care about the image. For me, Leicas are actually the easiest tools to use for most of my applications.
I I wanted to master a difficult, but simple tool, I would take up Kendo or fencing! Cameras are for making pictures IMHO!
I cannot understand this because the easy operation of cameras has been open to the masses since the box brownie. I don't think Leica has added features to make the cameras easier to use, but they have added live view, which makes the camera better for certain applications (tho not mine). The Leica M can still be operated by setting ISO and then exposure via aperture and shutter can it not?
One's photos gain no extra credits by virtue of being produced with a 'difficult to use Leica'. Nobody cares. They care about the image. For me, Leicas are actually the easiest tools to use for most of my applications.
I I wanted to master a difficult, but simple tool, I would take up Kendo or fencing! Cameras are for making pictures IMHO!