V
vizioneer
Guest
Haha well of course but we're talking strict comparisons.
Dear LeicaHeads
- Thread starter BigSteveG
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 50
- Views 3K
back alley
IMAGES
i don't do much in a strict way.
for the most part, with what most people shoot and how they shoot it, i really doubt that many people could tell a difference.
i'm not knocking leica at all btw. but for me, if it's only about sharpness then shooting with 35mm is pure folly as the glass for a mamiya 6 will blow the doors off any glass on a 35, german or japanese or whatever.
i have little patience with the whole sharpness and expense thing when it comes to 35mm shooting.
if you want the best then you need at least medium format but if you want quick, flexible and sexy then 35 is it.
joe
for the most part, with what most people shoot and how they shoot it, i really doubt that many people could tell a difference.
i'm not knocking leica at all btw. but for me, if it's only about sharpness then shooting with 35mm is pure folly as the glass for a mamiya 6 will blow the doors off any glass on a 35, german or japanese or whatever.
i have little patience with the whole sharpness and expense thing when it comes to 35mm shooting.
if you want the best then you need at least medium format but if you want quick, flexible and sexy then 35 is it.
joe
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
4 X 6 pics taken with the G2/45mm F2 look just as sharp as 4 X 6 pics taken with the Mamiya 6/normal. Same film. But I bet the Mamiya stuff blows up really good. 😉
back alley
IMAGES
exactly!!
joe
joe
V
vizioneer
Guest
Totally agreed backalley, you're speaking some straight talk. Although, I believe in bokeh! 😀
back alley
IMAGES
maybe i'm just too casual but the background out of focus areas don't ever seem to attract my attention, in either a negative or positive way. i look for limited dof in some shots, if i'm trying to isolate something but usually that's as far it goes.
and what nails it for me is i have never heard a non shooter mention, in any way, the oof areas in a photo.
joe
and what nails it for me is i have never heard a non shooter mention, in any way, the oof areas in a photo.
joe
Pymm
"Clacker"
I bought a Leica a couple of weeks ago, my fisrt 35mm camera. I did quite some research on the subject, and although money was not a too big issue I went for the M6 TTl instead of the M7 or MP. And because I wear glasses I went for the .58 with a 1.25.
The M7, as noted here before is dependant on electronics, and this is reall not Leicas best point. The guy in the shop where I always buy my camera stuff could of sold me a new M7, but mentioned that he had quite some returns on the M7 for faulty electronics. He then could of sold me a new MP but advise me on a A condition used M6TTL, which was half the price of the MP. I bought it with the 50mm Elmar (I like the tessar concept) and 2 days ago I got the 35mm summicron Asph. Roughly all for the same price as a new MP or M7 would of cost. I have a 2 year guarantee on the M6.
I tried out all viewfinders and found that the .58 was the best suited to my eyes. I got the 1.25 with it for if I ever want to use 75' or 90' but I am more a wideangle shooter.
The M6 is a beautiful camera and I'm pleased I bought it. The AE I don't miss since I always use lightmeters anyway and by now can roughly guess the light conditions.
As for fast lenses, I would love to have them, but taking the price into account I think Neopan 1600 or tri-x at 1000 is a worthier solution.
The M7, as noted here before is dependant on electronics, and this is reall not Leicas best point. The guy in the shop where I always buy my camera stuff could of sold me a new M7, but mentioned that he had quite some returns on the M7 for faulty electronics. He then could of sold me a new MP but advise me on a A condition used M6TTL, which was half the price of the MP. I bought it with the 50mm Elmar (I like the tessar concept) and 2 days ago I got the 35mm summicron Asph. Roughly all for the same price as a new MP or M7 would of cost. I have a 2 year guarantee on the M6.
I tried out all viewfinders and found that the .58 was the best suited to my eyes. I got the 1.25 with it for if I ever want to use 75' or 90' but I am more a wideangle shooter.
The M6 is a beautiful camera and I'm pleased I bought it. The AE I don't miss since I always use lightmeters anyway and by now can roughly guess the light conditions.
As for fast lenses, I would love to have them, but taking the price into account I think Neopan 1600 or tri-x at 1000 is a worthier solution.
celluloidprop
Well-known
My thinking is that I can always use Neopan 1600 with my 'lux - if you've got the money (or in my case, found a good deal on a used 'lux from Canada when the dollar was stronger), I don't believe there are any disadvantages to the faster lenses.
V
vizioneer
Guest
Other than price. Also, what's the diff between bokeh and OOF areas? To me they're the same.
steve garza
Well-known
Thanks guys. So the replies are a mixed lot to say the least....I've now dropped the Tri-focal from my list. It was never a must have. One of the main reasons I want a Leica is baecause of the fast lenses. I want to do more low light stuff. While I grew up driving "automatics", i.e. Canon Eos, now G-system, I've come to appreciate a mechanical, precision camera. I like the idea of an M6 (TTL not necessary as I don't like flash much) and a possible 75 or 90 2.0 I'm still stuck on the 35mm 1.4 (I've read the CV 1.2 is awfully heavy and the performance is good, but still not the highest quality.
Next questions:
Any discernible difference on the metering of M6 v. M7? what are ups and downs?
This one should prompt a heated exchange: what are the differences between the electronic shutter and the manual? (aside from battery issues)
Next questions:
Any discernible difference on the metering of M6 v. M7? what are ups and downs?
This one should prompt a heated exchange: what are the differences between the electronic shutter and the manual? (aside from battery issues)
steve garza
Well-known
Oh yeah....
Re: MP. How does the meter work as compared to the M6?
Re: MP. How does the meter work as compared to the M6?
back alley
IMAGES
so, is big steve g the same guy as steve garza?
joe
joe
celluloidprop
Well-known
The electronic shutter is supposedly more accurate and in AE mode is constantly variable.
I think the issue of 'control' is hogwash (if you feel the need to run manually, the M7 certainly allows it - though I don't know why anyone would in most situations) - no matter what camera it is, the photographer still has to compose, focus and fire. Battery-dependence was irrelevant to me as I'm not scaling K2 - I think I can keep a couple of small batteries in my pack or pocket.
Despite sounding like an M7 cheerleader, I'm not saying the M6 is a lesser machine. Getting one was my plan originally - but for a couple hundred more used back then, I saw no reason not to get AE and the electronic shutter. If it means the difference in one lens and a body vs. two or three lenses and a body, the M6 has to be a serious contender.
I think the issue of 'control' is hogwash (if you feel the need to run manually, the M7 certainly allows it - though I don't know why anyone would in most situations) - no matter what camera it is, the photographer still has to compose, focus and fire. Battery-dependence was irrelevant to me as I'm not scaling K2 - I think I can keep a couple of small batteries in my pack or pocket.
Despite sounding like an M7 cheerleader, I'm not saying the M6 is a lesser machine. Getting one was my plan originally - but for a couple hundred more used back then, I saw no reason not to get AE and the electronic shutter. If it means the difference in one lens and a body vs. two or three lenses and a body, the M6 has to be a serious contender.
steve garza
Well-known
Thanks Celluloid....I'll take your comments under advisement.
JOE: yes, I'm Garza....why? your question sounded a little ominous. I'm kinda worried.
JOE: yes, I'm Garza....why? your question sounded a little ominous. I'm kinda worried.
back alley
IMAGES
steve garza said:
nothing to worry about, i was curious why you registered twice.
it will cut down on your post count if you participate under 2 names😉
joe
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Wow... cellulloid, if I had had a chance to pile in just 200 bucks more for an M7, I would have done it. But I didn't find that kind of deal, so ended up buying an M6TTL thinking I had purchased an M6 (yes, I did).
Steve... the meter in the M6 (non-TTL) is a bit less sensitive than the one in the M6TTL and the current MP. As for the shutterspeeds, the M7's are supposedly even quieter, more accurate and vary according to the metering dictates if you use the camera in auto mode. As cellulloid said above, you can always switch it to manual. My reasoning it that if I have a full manual, I'll use it as such, and if I have a choice to go automatic... heck, I'll do it! 🙂
Some people say that the initial M6s are showing their electronic age. This is not true across the board, but it's something you may want to consider if you buy one. The M6TTL cameras are newer, so a metering problem lies further than in the case of an M6. Now, the M7 is, along with the MP, the newest toy, and given that their toothing aches must have been cured (some complain about problems with the first batches), this camera would be your safest bet.
I'm an unabashed fan of the M6TTL. I do like using flash now and then, so I recommend them. As for lenses, the set up I have has 2 'crons (50 & 90), a 35mm and an Elmarit 28/f2.8. I also have an Elmarit 135/f2.8 but don't use it as often.
Have fun shopping! 🙂
Steve... the meter in the M6 (non-TTL) is a bit less sensitive than the one in the M6TTL and the current MP. As for the shutterspeeds, the M7's are supposedly even quieter, more accurate and vary according to the metering dictates if you use the camera in auto mode. As cellulloid said above, you can always switch it to manual. My reasoning it that if I have a full manual, I'll use it as such, and if I have a choice to go automatic... heck, I'll do it! 🙂
Some people say that the initial M6s are showing their electronic age. This is not true across the board, but it's something you may want to consider if you buy one. The M6TTL cameras are newer, so a metering problem lies further than in the case of an M6. Now, the M7 is, along with the MP, the newest toy, and given that their toothing aches must have been cured (some complain about problems with the first batches), this camera would be your safest bet.
I'm an unabashed fan of the M6TTL. I do like using flash now and then, so I recommend them. As for lenses, the set up I have has 2 'crons (50 & 90), a 35mm and an Elmarit 28/f2.8. I also have an Elmarit 135/f2.8 but don't use it as often.
Have fun shopping! 🙂
MCTuomey
Veteran
Re fast glass in a 35mm, I think the CV 35/1.7 is hard to beat. It is functionally as sharp as my old DR Summicron for what I do with RFs - mostly available light shooting with 400 speed films.
My take on AE/electro vs not - I'm a newb so take my view accordingly weighted:
I bought an M4 for simplicity and for the AE/electronic side, I bought a Bessa R2A. My plan was to see which I prefer and then adjust the kit later. Well, I prefer the M4 - it just feels better to use. I'm keeping the Bessa because sometimes if I'm just snapping here and there then the AE and inboard meter are convenient. But it's not used very much. The style and rhythm of shooting the mechanical Leica are pleasing to me. Guess I could consolidate the two into an M7, but I like having two RFs ready to go.
I interchange lenses between the two using M adapters: CV 35/1.7, CV 75/2.5, Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, DR Summicron, and now out for CLA a Summarit (because the Cron is harsh to aging faces).
It sounds like money's not a barrier, so take a plunge in the direction that feels right. Then be flexible and willing to offload what doesn't work. The camera will find you, steve, as some wise souls here have said (without getting zen-ish on ya).
Good luck!
My take on AE/electro vs not - I'm a newb so take my view accordingly weighted:
I bought an M4 for simplicity and for the AE/electronic side, I bought a Bessa R2A. My plan was to see which I prefer and then adjust the kit later. Well, I prefer the M4 - it just feels better to use. I'm keeping the Bessa because sometimes if I'm just snapping here and there then the AE and inboard meter are convenient. But it's not used very much. The style and rhythm of shooting the mechanical Leica are pleasing to me. Guess I could consolidate the two into an M7, but I like having two RFs ready to go.
I interchange lenses between the two using M adapters: CV 35/1.7, CV 75/2.5, Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, DR Summicron, and now out for CLA a Summarit (because the Cron is harsh to aging faces).
It sounds like money's not a barrier, so take a plunge in the direction that feels right. Then be flexible and willing to offload what doesn't work. The camera will find you, steve, as some wise souls here have said (without getting zen-ish on ya).
Good luck!
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
SolaresLarrave said:
I'm confused by this statement, I've read this elsewhere. Here's why: I've seen people use M7s, and I thought they were a bit more audible than my M6 (classic) is. If the M2 is louder than my M6, then this would mean that my M6 is quieter than "normal", and that would explain my observation. Would you agree?
wilt
Well-known
Brian Sweeney said:
The M3 is very well designed. A pleasure to use with a 50. I shoot it with both the J8 and the Summicron 50.
Someone mentioned a 35 'lux and 75 'cron combination, and that sounds excellent to me. You have the speed in the wider angle which should see more use in smaller darker spaces, and the 75 is still usefully fast. The 75 'lux has such narrow depth of field wide open that I'd think it gets tricky to use, as 1cm or 2cm of DoF is awfully limited! I think the shorter focal length of the 35 Summilux makes f/1.4 more broadly usable.
Also, early reports, such as from Roger Hicks, indicate the new 75 Summicron produces a specially elegant look... though of course the 75 Summilux has a stellar repuation too.
My first interchangeable RF lens was a new 35 Summicron, some 40 years ago, and it was followed by a 90 Tele-Elmarit a year later. But the 35 saw by far the more use, and if anything the 90 is used even less in recent years. I also have a 75mm Color Heliar that is a fine little lens too but also has seen little use. Even when I finally got my first RF 50mm last year, it tends to sit on the shelf as well.
I just love 35-40mm lenses, and I'm about equally fond of 28mm, so for me a 28 + 40 set handles just about everything. But everyone has their own approach to photography so there's plenty of room for other preferences. If you see yourself getting much use out of lenses longer than 50mm or so, then in combination with a 35, the 75mm focal length is likely to be a good choice. And that new smaller lighter 75 Summicron looks like a real gem.
Also, early reports, such as from Roger Hicks, indicate the new 75 Summicron produces a specially elegant look... though of course the 75 Summilux has a stellar repuation too.
My first interchangeable RF lens was a new 35 Summicron, some 40 years ago, and it was followed by a 90 Tele-Elmarit a year later. But the 35 saw by far the more use, and if anything the 90 is used even less in recent years. I also have a 75mm Color Heliar that is a fine little lens too but also has seen little use. Even when I finally got my first RF 50mm last year, it tends to sit on the shelf as well.
I just love 35-40mm lenses, and I'm about equally fond of 28mm, so for me a 28 + 40 set handles just about everything. But everyone has their own approach to photography so there's plenty of room for other preferences. If you see yourself getting much use out of lenses longer than 50mm or so, then in combination with a 35, the 75mm focal length is likely to be a good choice. And that new smaller lighter 75 Summicron looks like a real gem.
To me too! Indeed, I believe that's the very definition of "bokeh"... the look of the out-of-focus areas. A neutral term, it's just there as a fact of optics/nature. If you notice it or not, or detect different kinds of bokeh, or find some kinds pleasant or unpleasant, then you can use other descriptive terms to describe the bokeh.vizioneer said:
