boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
That he was at times provocative and sometimes not and caused consternation does not set him apart from many on this board. Let
us hope that we do not ever descend into a homogeneous group of "yea sayers" who all get along just fine. This board is supposed to be for discussion and exchange of ideas. If there is no difference there is no exchange.
us hope that we do not ever descend into a homogeneous group of "yea sayers" who all get along just fine. This board is supposed to be for discussion and exchange of ideas. If there is no difference there is no exchange.
kkdanamatt
Well-known
I like manual RF cameras when shooting with lenses up to 35mm focal length.
The Leica M2 is my first choice because of the uncluttered VF.
Using anything greater than the 35mm focal length, I need the AF from an SLR or a mirrorless DSLR.
The Leica M2 is my first choice because of the uncluttered VF.
Using anything greater than the 35mm focal length, I need the AF from an SLR or a mirrorless DSLR.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Discussion has, at its base, the sensibilities ofThat he was at times provocative and sometimes not and caused consternation does not set him apart from many on this board. Let
us hope that we do not ever descend into a homogeneous group of "yea sayers" who all get along just fine. This board is supposed to be for discussion and exchange of ideas. If there is no difference there is no exchange.
- articulating your position/understanding of an issue,
- listening to responses,
- and responding thoughtfully with agreement or disagreement based upon your analytic understanding.
It doesn't mean arguing or making non-sequitur questions/responses without thought or reason, or having an indefatigable obstinacy for a position that has no merit.
G
Richard G
Veteran
There was a good discussion in the why do you take pictures thread and some serious philosophical exchanges. He likes sailing close to the wind. And he knows the risks. This is not just another photographic forum. Won’t surprise me if he returns and I’d be pleased to see him back. A few have gone and retuned. Good people too. Very good one of them. Another I worried he had serious demons he was wrestling with, displaced to picking fights. In a club there is only so much you can do.
Dennisoutside
Newbie
Right on about Canon screw mount lenses. They can be amazing.Rangefinder shooting with a Leica M brings its own special rewards and challenges. I have to say that while I was a dedicated Leica M guy in my 40's now that I am in my 60's I do sometimes struggle. I say this for a few reasons. Back then I always shot with a Leica M3 which had the best viewfinder and I found it eminently workable.
-The M3 had a finder magnification of .91. Since then it has all been downhill somewhat - I bought a Leica M8 digital without quite realizing what impact a viewfinder magnification of a paltry .68 would have on my shooting. The M10 has .73 I believe - better than my old M8 but not by a hell of a lot and I do find it restricting. Possibly OK if you shoot 28mm or 35mm where the depth of field is greater and focusing accuracy less critical but if you are like me and like shooting 50mm and 90mm then - bad luck! Shooting with these slightly longer lenses is a bit of a crap shoot. Of course, you could use a top mounted accessory EVF but these are hellish expensive and of course kind of defeat the purpose of using a rangefinder camera. Or you can do as I do a use a screw in accessory magnifier for the viewfinder. But the best ones are Leica and again cost $$$$$$$$$$$.
-My eyes have aged significantly and Leica M cameras do not have any inbuilt diopter adjustments. Of course you can buy a suitable Leica screw in diopter but last time I checked my local camera store these Leica ones are $400 Australian (not sure in USA or Europe but you get the idea.) And if your eyeglass prescription changes over the years as mine did then you must once more buy a new diopter as the Leica ones each only come in a single level of adjustment. You can find some 3rd party adjustable ones and buy one of these, but these tend not to be as good as the Leica ones (of course) through they can work. BTW finding the right diopter is a bit of an art and a science in itself due to the way Leica calibrate their finders. That is to say if your eyeglass prescription is for -2 diopters do not assume the diopter you need to buy will be the same - it is not. (I will leave you to do the research on the intricacies.) I would advise that if you go down the Leica M route and need eye glass correction then consider buying a variable diopter one - it's just easier although it comes with its own issues.
- Success with a Leica M depends on what your shooting habits, expectations and subject types are. You need to be quite slow and deliberate. If this does not describe your style of shooting then maybe a Leica M is not for you. If it si - then have at it!
- You need to budget for a recalibration of your rangefinder - many people do it annually (which also means being without the camera for a time and if you send it to Leica that might be for quite a long time. But it is something a good technician can do if you can find one locally. Again there will be a cost (I would guess around $100+ for the service) BTW I have had mine go out of calibration even though I "baby" the camera. But if your camera takes a bump or sometimes even vibration (as in an overhead storage on a long flight - this happened to mine) then this can do it too. And that can ruin a holiday - believe me, I know.
- I own some modern digital cameras but only have one or two AF lenses for them. My preference is to shoot manual focus in any event as I like trying out old vintage lenses (including Leica M glass and Leica LTM glass) on them. AF comes in handy when I know that the shooting success is likely to depending on me being able to focus and shoot quickly. I have nothing against AF and enjoy using such equipment when the need and opportunity arises. MF does take some getting used to but it's not by any means an insurmountable hurdle. And with Leica M cameras there are relatively few settings to worry about and once the camera is set up for the most part you just need to think about focusing, aperture, shutter speed and that's it (and even then these days shutter speed can be left to the camera - but you still need to be cognizant of what happending with the other two variables.)
- Shooting Leica M cameras are a labor of love. If you fall for it you will willingly tolerate all of the crap that comes with it. (A bit like being married).BTW one good thing is that Leica glass is excellent (of course) but if you are not able to ante up the kind of cash needed then these days there are lots of alternatives (there are some very good Leica vintage lenes some of which are pretty reasonably priced, some vintage glass by other makers which are likewise (e.g. Canon rangefinder lenses in Leica Thread ZZMount which work brilliantly on Leica M with an LTM_M adapter) and modern glass out of Asia some of which is very good. So there are some great options here. Most of my Leica M glass these days are a combo of all 3 of the above including some very good glass by Voigtlander (Cosina).
I know I am sounding far too negative over-all but I just want you to understand the downsides of shooting Leica M cameras as well as the upside. As for me if I were shooting film still, I would probably have kept my M3 and still be more or less happily shooting this Leica M camera but as I now shoot digital exclusively, this is not on the cards. I was a couple of years back seriously tempted to buy a Leica type 240 M but was put off by all of the above considerations drawn from my own prior experience. My next Leica (if indeed there is one in my future) is more likely to be one in the SL mirrorless range. And there is another option that many people have chosen who crave a rangefinder like experience.........buy a Fujifilm X Pro 2 or Xpro 3 which is not a bad compromise when the rangefinder bug bites.
alan2306
Newbie
I shoot street photography with a Leica M10P. I have to react to fast moving subjects all the time, that's why I use a rangefinder. I use 21mm and 28mm and zone focus. When set to f11 everything less than a metre to infinity is in focus. My Leica becomes a point and shoot. No auto focus is faster than that.I primarily use autofocus cameras, but I also shoot many different rangefinder cameras including a Leica M10. The Leica is really my favorite, providing I don't need to shoot fast. It really depends on what you are going to photograph. Most of what I shoot are static subjects, so taking time to focus is not a problem and I enjoy it, but if you're shooting fast moving kids or sports I would stick to AF. ---jb.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
How you transition depends on what kind of photography you do. If you like to shoot trees and rocks then you’ll transition fine. Some people look at the rangefinder as a niche tool for documentary photography and depending on your style can require reaction time. Someone walking around the corner with Elvis and Bigfoot on each arm 15 feet away. What do you do? An AF camera can get that shot because not only it’ll focus but also meter perhaps even auto fill flash. Do you need the automation? Will you put the time in so you and your rangefinder of choice can get that shot? The more you work at it the easier will the transition be. I just bought a Leica M1 from KEH because the RF isn’t even necessary. Street photography with 21mm to 28mm lenses doesn’t need focusing. With practice it is easy to guess focus from 5 feet on, Reading the light without a meter is not difficult just practice and practice.
Last edited:
Bill Clark
Veteran
I have to be careful with auto focus. It sometimes will focus on something I don’t need in perfect focus. I like my manual focus Leicas as I control focus, shutter and f stop.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
I knew someone who shot birds with manual focus super telephoto lenses and his work is brilliant like birds catching prey in mid flight. It just takes practice. I asked him why not AF? He said he didn’t need it. The last time we went out on a photo trip he had a 8x10 and only 5 holders preloaded with film. I asked why only 10 sheets for a 3 day trip? He said he didn’t need any more film. Oh the confidence.
Archiver
Veteran
That's quite possible. With a rangefinder, I can easily keep both eyes open with no obstruction of my left eye, and get a sense of the action as it unfolds. Not so easy with a SLR/DSLR/mirrorless camera with the EVF in the middle unless I tilt my head. Also, the 'pure' optical viewfinder of a RF means you're still seeing the scene with both eyes, rather than the magnified or widened view of whatever lens is mounted to a DSLR/mirrorless camera.Very interesting. Matches my experience with the school basketball. Is it that the Leica has you looking, with a camera, not looking through a camera? With right eye to the finder maybe that’s part of it.
Archiver
Veteran
With mirrorless cameras, I try to work around this by using spot or extremely small field focus, and use focus-recompose technique like I do with a RF. When shooting sports, I use face/body detection linked to the field, a feature in Panasonic cameras.I have to be careful with auto focus. It sometimes will focus on something I don’t need in perfect focus. I like my manual focus Leicas as I control focus, shutter and f stop.
Autofocus has its uses, just as manual focus. A couple of weeks ago, I shot an engagement party for a dear friend which turned out to be a gender reveal as well. They burst a giant balloon filled with pink hearts in a darkened room; I shot video with my Panasonic S1 held in my left hand, and images with my SL2-S in the right simultaneously. Using my M9 to shoot stills would have been a lot harder.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Yeah, guess distance, guess exposure. It can be done. On film, too. But I'd bet a mortgage payment that you batting average will rise with autofocus and auto ISO. If you have the time, and the skill, it can be done. But do we have the skill, and is there always time? Maybe in your world, not in mine.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Estimating distance and exposure settings simply takes practice, and is virtually instantaneous. So the time factor drops out, and all it takes is skill.Yeah, guess distance, guess exposure. It can be done. On film, too. But I'd bet a mortgage payment that you batting average will rise with autofocus and auto ISO. If you have the time, and the skill, it can be done. But do we have the skill, and is there always time? Maybe in your world, not in mine.
I tend to prefer skill over relying purely upon machines. I've been estimating distance and exposure settings since I was 12 years old. While I have my occasional miss, I get it right at least as often as any automation-equipped camera I've used does.
G
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
Hyperfocal saves the day 
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.