Ken Rockwell's "Observation" regarding the M8

[Ade-oh]

Rockwell is great: he's the small boy who shouts out that the Emperor's got no clothes on. He makes no bones about the fact that, if you want sharper pictures with more resolution, then use a bigger format; he doesn't pretend that having the latest DSLR with the most megapixels will make you a better photographer; and he isn't slavishly loyal to any particular brand. A lot of what is on his site is very useful, including the 'real world' lens comparisons, and a lot of it is quite amusing. I certainly don't agree with much of what he says, but I'm not going to wet my pants and go crying to mummy because he doesn't like Leicas. I find him a refreshing voice and he is certainly one of the most useful sources of information if buying Canon or Nikon gear.

I don't really like his photography, but I doubt he would like mine either.

 

[dcsang]

Well, they "loaned" the camera to Mr. Kamber in the first place...🙄

I was talking about doing such tests before they released it into the wild - beta testing in other words.

Giving an almost 2 year old camera to a PJ in a war zone when you really haven't "fixed" (per se) the initial problems you didn't reveal to the general public in the first place isn't exactly a good test plan. 🙄🙄

Dave

 

[infrequent]

@dcsang - you think leica has a plan?

 

[dcsang]

@dcsang - you think leica has a plan?

Well, as I said earlier in this thread, I may be expecting too much from a company that is so small.

Dave

 

[MichaelW]

If you want a really good laugh, look at KR's car reviews. Something about "hot German iron".

 

[georgef]

Ha ha 😀
Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts.

My co-workers wondered what I was laughing at when I read this:
"...When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories ..."😀😀

 

[georgef]

i didn't buy my MP & M6 because they were the most techno, i bought them simply because they are the most reliable of all cameras out there. the Leica ASPH series of lenses arguably the best glass made in the modern era. why would i want anything else?

it depends on your subject interests...longer focal lengths, motordrives, macro and AF for those who accept that our fingers are NOT as fast as AF .
RF is a limited type of camera, just like an SLR, TLR, etc, it does not work for everything.

 

[jaapv]

I was talking about doing such tests before they released it into the wild - beta testing in other words.

Giving an almost 2 year old camera to a PJ in a war zone when you really haven't "fixed" (per se) the initial problems you didn't reveal to the general public in the first place isn't exactly a good test plan. 🙄🙄

Dave

You're quite right there, Dave. An even worse plan was not to inform him fully about the cans and cannots of the camera. That sent him in with the impression that is was a film M with just a sensor in place of the film, obviously.

 

[jaapv]

it depends on your subject interests...longer focal lengths, motordrives, macro and AF for those who accept that our fingers are NOT as fast as AF .
.

Maybe not as fast, but I think my brain is better at putting the focus where I want it than the little tribe of engineers that lives inside a DSLR.

 

[kevin m]

...I think my brain is better at putting the focus where I want it than the little tribe of engineers that lives inside a DSLR.

Care to take a challenge?

Summilux 75 vs. Canon 85/1.2, full aperture, 10 feet from subject. The Canon will spot you 10mm in focal length and 1/2 stop of aperture.

36 frames, the most shots in focus wins.

 

[jaapv]

Care to take a challenge?

Summilux 75 vs. Canon 85/1.2, full aperture, 10 feet from subject. The Canon will spot you 10mm in focal length and 1/2 stop of aperture.

36 frames, the most shots in focus wins.

I don't care one whit about technically in focus. When I shoot a bird in flight I want the eye to be in focus, not the wingtip or tail. With that kind of dynamic work there is no way you can put a sensor on the eye and shoot and even hope for it to be there when the camera fires. On a matte screen of a manual SLR or with the zero lag of a RF- no problem.
Don't tell me new pro DSLR's have improved shutter lag - I know they have vastly improved shutterlag -but it is still there. Nor do multiple and automatic AF sensors help - there is always space in between.

 

[David Goldfarb]

I don't care one whit about technically in focus. When I shoot a bird in flight I want the eye to be in focus, not the wingtip or tail.

I don't think I'd use a rangefinder for flight shots of birds, just because the maximum focal lengths are too short, but this is the problem with autofocus. Focus position is one of the main aesthetic choices when making a photograph and giving that choice up to a machine is more than I'm willing to give.

Look at a lot of autofocus bird photos, and impressive as they may sometimes be, they often needlessly have the nearest contrasty thing in focus (like the beak) instead of the eye, when this just wouldn't be an issue with manual focus. Of course autofocus can be turned off with the kinds of lenses usually used for bird photography, but autofocus lenses often don't focus manually as easily as a manual focus lens, and you're carrying a lens that's often 40% heavier than a comparable manual focus lens and four or five times as expensive. Even if the newer AF lens is optically superior to the older MF lens, it doesn't matter if it focuses on the wrong thing.

 

[dcsang]

I don't care one whit about technically in focus. When I shoot a bird in flight I want the eye to be in focus, not the wingtip or tail. With that kind of dynamic work there is no way you can put a sensor on the eye and shoot and even hope for it to be there when the camera fires.

Hmm.. I don't know Jaap - makes me think that you haven't used or owned a recent DSLR - what you state may have been true for the days of the Canon D30 or perhaps those Kodak DSLRs but not now.

I have been using the 50mm f1.2 L lens (the lens that some folks disdain for one reason or another) and I seem to do just fine during the reception when people are dancing and moving and the AF on the 5D with the 580 EX flash and the 50mm L wide open seems to do just fine. And most, if not all, of these reception halls are quite dark.

I'm shooting at ISO 1600 and there have been times when I have to struggle to get 1/125 - luckily, with the fast lenses, I can bump that up once the subjects dance into a decently "lit" area; but still, at f4 I'd lose the shutter speed.

I know that with the M8 I could go to say ISO1250 but I don't think I could trust my eyes and hands to focus fast enough, shooting wide open, to capture the shot.

Dave

 

[Socke]

Acurate framing and focusing depends on so many things in any camera besides a viewcamera that I think the discussion is moot.

With MF SLRs you can have misalligned focusingscreens, with rangefinders you can have misalligned rangefinders and lenses. Framing depends on accurate framlines on rangefinders and on accurate focusing screens on SLRs.


I'm pretty sure what my father would have done to get a flying birds eye only in focus, he would have shot the bird, stuffed it and hanged it in front of a nice background. Then he'd set up his Mastertechnica, focused with a x4 loupe on the screen and later he'd retouched the strings which suspended the bird. See, perfect framing and focus on a bird in flight.

Come to think of it, he'd probably used TechPan and handcoloured it since chromes are never the right colour 😀

 

[jaapv]

Hmm.. I don't know Jaap - makes me think that you haven't used or owned a recent DSLR - what you state may have been true for the days of the Canon D30 or perhaps those Kodak DSLRs but not now.

I have been using the 50mm f1.2 L lens (the lens that some folks disdain for one reason or another) and I seem to do just fine during the reception when people are dancing and moving and the AF on the 5D with the 580 EX flash and the 50mm L wide open seems to do just fine. And most, if not all, of these reception halls are quite dark.

I'm shooting at ISO 1600 and there have been times when I have to struggle to get 1/125 - luckily, with the fast lenses, I can bump that up once the subjects dance into a decently "lit" area; but still, at f4 I'd lose the shutter speed.

I know that with the M8 I could go to say ISO1250 but I don't think I could trust my eyes and hands to focus fast enough, shooting wide open, to capture the shot.

Dave

Hmm.. I've got dozens of these: (Sorry, DMR and 400 mm, no RF, but I have those as well )

 

[dcsang]

Hmm.. I've got dozens of these: (Sorry, DMR and 400 mm, no RF, but I have those as well )

Yep.. just as I have hundreds of shots to prove otherwise.

I am merely stating that your claim; the "eye" should be in focus and not the wingtip cannot be done with an AF DSLR is, well, incorrect.

Dave

 

[palker]

maybe they were just "grab shots" as Ken likes to call them 🙂

 

[Richard Marks]

Care to take a challenge?

Summilux 75 vs. Canon 85/1.2, full aperture, 10 feet from subject. The Canon will spot you 10mm in focal length and 1/2 stop of aperture.

36 frames, the most shots in focus wins.

Hi
Not sure this comparison helps
'Most shots' in focus is missing the point. One good shot in focus is better than 1000 mundane technically perfectly exposed perfectly focused shots. In fact even a slightly off focus good shot is better than a perfectly focussed but uninspiring one.
You only need one good shot. Id spend the time with the 75 lux getting a killer shot in a relaxed and unhurried manner with a nice natural composition whilst the competition was farting around with autofocus motor drive fill flash autowhite ballancing exposure bracketing....oops in the wrong mode does my lens hood look big in this ......etc.
yeh bring it on!

Richard

 

[peripatetic]

I don't care one whit about technically in focus. When I shoot a bird in flight I want the eye to be in focus, not the wingtip or tail. With that kind of dynamic work there is no way you can put a sensor on the eye and shoot and even hope for it to be there when the camera fires. On a matte screen of a manual SLR or with the zero lag of a RF- no problem.
Don't tell me new pro DSLR's have improved shutter lag - I know they have vastly improved shutterlag -but it is still there. Nor do multiple and automatic AF sensors help - there is always space in between.

Are you for real?

You can manually focus on the eye of a bird in flight? Nothing on your website to suggest that.

And a DSLR has more shutter lag than a manual SLR? Comparing which to which?

Whatever you're taking, you should probably take less of it. Maybe these guys are your friends or something and don't want to be rude but you're just talking ****.

 

[Gid]

Are you for real?

You can manually focus on the eye of a bird in flight? Nothing on your website to suggest that.

And a DSLR has more shutter lag than a manual SLR? Comparing which to which?

Whatever you're taking, you should probably take less of it. Maybe these guys are your friends or something and don't want to be rude but you're just talking ****.

You shouldn't be afraid to say what you think, really😀

jaapv is a dentist and I think he has been at the laughing gas 😉

To be honest, I can't even see the eye of a bird in flight let alone focus on it - unless it was an ostrich or something similar.