Steve_F
Well-known
Hi all,
I've had my M6TTL (first M) for 9 months now and was trying to figure out something that was 'lacking' in my Leica photography - it's getting in close. The near focus on the Leica is so much less than my FM3A (Nikkors)
My 'style' (for want of a better word) is to get in close. I can't do this with the Leica. An example is a scene outside a cafe - cup/mug/ashtray very, very prominent in the frame, and stop down to 2.8 or 4 so as to just bring the background in. Or my 7 month old daughter beginning to crawl on her stomach. Just hands and face filling the frame.
It really is quite frustrating. :bang:
So much so that I am seriously contemplating going back to full Nikon again.
Any other users out there feel the same or offer a sensible priced alternative (not a 90 Elmar Macro set-up).
Cheers,
Steve.
I've had my M6TTL (first M) for 9 months now and was trying to figure out something that was 'lacking' in my Leica photography - it's getting in close. The near focus on the Leica is so much less than my FM3A (Nikkors)
My 'style' (for want of a better word) is to get in close. I can't do this with the Leica. An example is a scene outside a cafe - cup/mug/ashtray very, very prominent in the frame, and stop down to 2.8 or 4 so as to just bring the background in. Or my 7 month old daughter beginning to crawl on her stomach. Just hands and face filling the frame.
It really is quite frustrating. :bang:
So much so that I am seriously contemplating going back to full Nikon again.
Any other users out there feel the same or offer a sensible priced alternative (not a 90 Elmar Macro set-up).
Cheers,
Steve.
dogberryjr
[Pithy phrase]
It's still .7m minimum focus, but I think the 28mm Elmarit would suit your purposes.
hendriphile
Well-known
A DR Summicron will focus to 20" and @ f/2 will give a tiny DOF... but it may or may not fit on your M6... you'd have to try a sample on your M6 to ensure compatibility.
JPSuisse
Well-known
So what focal lengths did you generally use on your Nikons?
What focus lengths do you have for your M?
What distance do you usually shoot from?
JP
What focus lengths do you have for your M?
What distance do you usually shoot from?
JP
Matus
Well-known
Hey - there are 35, 50 (older summicron) and 90 mm lenses that come with googles for rangefinder that allow quite a bit closer focusing. They can only be used on Leica cameras as they must fit perfectly on the rangefinder position/size/optics.
I hope others can share more details.
I hope others can share more details.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Steve,
Any 90mm at a metre gives you about the same field of view as a 50mm at 18 inches or so. But given your style, indeed, an SLR may suit you better.
Cheers,
R.
Any 90mm at a metre gives you about the same field of view as a 50mm at 18 inches or so. But given your style, indeed, an SLR may suit you better.
Cheers,
R.
Mudman
Well-known
exactly what I've been doing Roger. When I need closer, I switch to a longer lens.
ferider
Veteran
One of the two Leica 75mm lenses that focus down to 0.7m.
k.a
Well-known
i bougth a cheep 90mm tele elemarit for "this" purpose of getting close. it focus down to about one meter which is enogth to get almost macro
Steve M.
Veteran
Just buy a Leicaflex SL w/ a Summicron 50 and 90. They focus MUCH closer than the rangefinder lenses, and are just as good. Nikon lenses, well, they aren't Summicrons, know what I mean? And the Leicaflex will make your Nikons seem like not-so-well built cameras in comparisons. The viewfinder in the SL is like a big, bright picture window. I'm still kicking myself for selling mine, but if I go back to 35mm that's the only camera I'll need.
This was w/ an R 50 Summicron.
This was w/ an R 50 Summicron.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Leica M is not for me
Leica M is not for me
Steve,
I'm with you. There are so many annoying things about the Leicas, at least with the bodies I can afford.
First is the cost. For an amateur photog, IMO there's no need for Leica gear. For FAR less $$, I can have a top of the line Nikon film body and mint lenses... same gear that's produced fabulous pictures for many pros for years and years.
Image quality from Leica gear is over-hyped IMO, especially for amateur photographers that aren't making huge prints. I've found that Nikkor and Voigtlander lenses give me stunning results.
The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds. No such problem with SLRs. I cannot see the widest frameline of the M2, 3, 4, or 6 (the bodies I've tried), at least not without moving my eye all over the place. By that time, the 'decisive moment' is long gone.
With my SLRs I can mount any focal length and not have to resort to add-on viewfinders or guesswork.
Close focus issue... too many work-arounds using rangefinder gear!
There's only one issue that keeps me in the rangefinder game, and that's quiet shutters. My little Nikon FG is pretty quiet, but those M, LTM, and fixed-lens rangefinder cameras are QUIET! But I've just about gotten over this issue as well.
Leica M is not for me
Steve,
I'm with you. There are so many annoying things about the Leicas, at least with the bodies I can afford.
First is the cost. For an amateur photog, IMO there's no need for Leica gear. For FAR less $$, I can have a top of the line Nikon film body and mint lenses... same gear that's produced fabulous pictures for many pros for years and years.
Image quality from Leica gear is over-hyped IMO, especially for amateur photographers that aren't making huge prints. I've found that Nikkor and Voigtlander lenses give me stunning results.
The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds. No such problem with SLRs. I cannot see the widest frameline of the M2, 3, 4, or 6 (the bodies I've tried), at least not without moving my eye all over the place. By that time, the 'decisive moment' is long gone.
With my SLRs I can mount any focal length and not have to resort to add-on viewfinders or guesswork.
Close focus issue... too many work-arounds using rangefinder gear!
There's only one issue that keeps me in the rangefinder game, and that's quiet shutters. My little Nikon FG is pretty quiet, but those M, LTM, and fixed-lens rangefinder cameras are QUIET! But I've just about gotten over this issue as well.
Dwig
Well-known
Exactly. The OP's rant about "Leica" and mention of possibly "going back to full Nikon again" need to be translated into the correct terms, "rangefinder" and "going to an SLR" respectively.
The limitations the OP mentions are not Leica specific, they apply to all RF's, even the great Nikon RF's from the '50s. The advantages alluded of returning to Nikon aren't Nikon specific, but instead apply to virtually all SLRs.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
the ZM lenses focus down closer than 2m I believe. The 15mm CV Heliar will focus to one foot. On any M body these are scale focus distances. The Zeiss Ikon has a longer RF baselength and closer focusing than a Leica M is built in, I believe that's why the ZM lenses are like this. It's one reason that I'm looking to get an F2 and a micro-Nikkor for my next trip.
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
braver
Well-known
Hey like you said, it shouldn't be so bad to shoot nikon. Lots of famous photogs do very well without any need of Leica. Wouldn't want to be in a magazine fashion shoot with a leica, 28 elmarit and a roll of trix. It's the bees knees outonthe street, but you need to pick a camera that works best where you are, not the other way around. No shame in going all Nikon, the stuff rocks, especially when you look at the price tags.
ferider
Veteran
Part of the problem is created by our online-selves, by promoting a wrong stereotype, namely that RFs and Teles don't go together.
An M3 with 75 or 90mm lens is about as perfect a portrait setup, as it gets, IMO. Also with eye glasses. And no, 50mm lenses don't need to get closer than 1m - if you also carry a 90mm in your bag. Etc.
Roland.
cnphoto
Well-known
Standard pros v cons. If your cons outweigh your pros, find a better solution.
I did this and rangefinders where, for me, the best solution.
I did this and rangefinders where, for me, the best solution.
Joop van Heijgen
Established
For macro and close up work I do use the Leicaflex SL with the Macro-Elmarit R 2,8/60 and the Elmarit 2,8/90...
Magnificent lenses and not too expensive to buy...
The Leicaflex have the same quality level as the M 4, M6 etc...
Magnificent lenses and not too expensive to buy...
The Leicaflex have the same quality level as the M 4, M6 etc...
Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5, wide-open, on the M8:
On the Nikon SP, wide-open.
Summicron 90/2, E48 version, wide-open on the M8:
Canon Serenar 85/2 on the M8, wide-open.
These go for $125 or less.
On the Nikon SP, wide-open.
Summicron 90/2, E48 version, wide-open on the M8:
Canon Serenar 85/2 on the M8, wide-open.
These go for $125 or less.
Steve_F
Well-known
Once again stacks of helpful information. Thanks.
I hope nobody feels this was a jibe at Leica. It is simply a RF v SLR comparison as was pointed out.
I tended to use 35mm/2 and 50/1.8 on my FM3A. The flip side being that wide open off centre the quality between the two manufacturers is apparent. Stopped down slightly I have had 18x12 prints with my Nikkors.
I love the size and quietness of my M - not that the FM3A is big or noisy. I've spent to much time tabbing with stacks of kit too(ref 25lbs Canon DSLR). Taking my Mamiya RZ67 set up and a Nikon F5 up the beautiful mountains of Snowdonia North Wales.
I guess the truth is an SLR is more my style, of course I now have a tiny Leica set-up when I should have maybe bought Zeiss ZF!
Any further info etc is still appreciated.
Steve.
I hope nobody feels this was a jibe at Leica. It is simply a RF v SLR comparison as was pointed out.
I tended to use 35mm/2 and 50/1.8 on my FM3A. The flip side being that wide open off centre the quality between the two manufacturers is apparent. Stopped down slightly I have had 18x12 prints with my Nikkors.
I love the size and quietness of my M - not that the FM3A is big or noisy. I've spent to much time tabbing with stacks of kit too(ref 25lbs Canon DSLR). Taking my Mamiya RZ67 set up and a Nikon F5 up the beautiful mountains of Snowdonia North Wales.
I guess the truth is an SLR is more my style, of course I now have a tiny Leica set-up when I should have maybe bought Zeiss ZF!
Any further info etc is still appreciated.
Steve.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Jamie, you're pushing it, bud. Don't do it Jamie. Don't burst the Leica balloon, don't please.Steve,
I'm with you. There are so many annoying things about the Leicas, at least with the bodies I can afford.
First is the cost. For an amateur photog, IMO there's no need for Leica gear. For FAR less $$, I can have a top of the line Nikon film body and mint lenses... same gear that's produced fabulous pictures for many pros for years and years.
Image quality from Leica gear is over-hyped IMO, especially for amateur photographers that aren't making huge prints. I've found that Nikkor and Voigtlander lenses give me stunning results.
The Leica viewfinders are a real pain-in-the-rear for us eyeglass wearers. Any time this issue comes up here, we spend whole threads talking about work-arounds. No such problem with SLRs. I cannot see the widest frameline of the M2, 3, 4, or 6 (the bodies I've tried), at least not without moving my eye all over the place. By that time, the 'decisive moment' is long gone.
With my SLRs I can mount any focal length and not have to resort to add-on viewfinders or guesswork.
Close focus issue... too many work-arounds using rangefinder gear!
There's only one issue that keeps me in the rangefinder game, and that's quiet shutters. My little Nikon FG is pretty quiet, but those M, LTM, and fixed-lens rangefinder cameras are QUIET! But I've just about gotten over this issue as well.