Leica ll 1932

[Erik van Straten]

I never use a lightmeter. Lightmeters only keep you away from looking at the subject and they make you to forget to shoot at the right moment.

Leica III, Elmar 50mm f/3.5, 400-2TMY/Adox MCC 110.

Erik.

 

[jcb4718]

How do you judge exposure, Erik?

 

[Erik van Straten]

How do you judge exposure, Erik?

Outside, I always use 1/100th of a second. I only change the f-stop. If it is dark, I open it a bit and if there is enough light I close it a bit.


Erik.

 

[Pál_K]

Here's my 1934 Leica III with nickel Elmar 50/3.5 which I used daily this year for two months (carried in a small pouch). I bought it with the lens a few years ago from a friend - about $500. All speeds work.

My choice of film was Rollei RPX 25, so I used slower shutter speeds and wider apertures than I'd have liked at times. That Elmar seems best around f/8 or f/11.

 

[HuubL]

The classic set (open in new window):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BcS7ZkeaP_r8ROVSli_jDUSbXFpGg4wd/view

 

[Dralowid]

Ha! The elusive black nosed (or black rim) Summar!

 

[Richard G]

I never use a lightmeter. Lightmeters only keep you away from looking at the subject and they make you to forget to shoot at the right moment.

I wish I had read this when I was 17. For some months after I got my first camera I had no light meter. I used my mother’s camera’s light meter but soon just relied on the Kodak film box end guide. Nine years later during a month in Italy this worked well even with slides (transparencies/colour reversal.) So many good shots I did indeed miss for the slow CdS Gossen meter where every light situation seemed always to be in the border between the low light and outdoor bright range. Maddening. Back to less reliance on the meter only in recent years.

 

[Pál_K]

I never use a lightmeter. Lightmeters only keep you away from looking at the subject and they make you to forget to shoot at the right moment.
...

That makes sense for a lot of photographic situations.

Only when photographing landscapes, buildings, or some plants and trees (none of which move quickly) might I choose to use a meter. I've learned exposure from decades of meterless photography.

Your nice photo illustrates your point well.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Your nice photo illustrates your point well.

Thank you!

Leica II, Hektor 50mm f/2.5, Tmax400/Adox MCC 110.

Erik.

 

[p.giannakis]

Lovely picture Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Merci Pan!


Erik.

 

[Rob-F]

looking for some thoughts on a purchase im thinking about; Leica D from 1932 black paint with nickel elmar, condition looks to be very good to excellent with a supposed recent(this year) cla. asking price is $1000, ive never used a LTM leica so my main concerns are the price being fair and the tiny viewfinder/rangefinder. Any words of wisdom would be appreciated

I have a II of exactly the same description, with nickel Elmar, except it's from 1934, and no CLA. I paid less than $400 for it. I think you can do much better, with a little patience.

 

[shawn]

And you'll need an exposure meter and they don't allow flash.

Shooting meterless outdoors is pretty easy once you get the hang of it. I use a lightmeter on my iPhone if needed.

Not that I'd ever use it but some old Barnacks allow flash.

Shawn

 

[Hari]

I carry my Leica II black w/collap. Summicron always,
but sometimes take the 15/4.5 Voitl. or the Canon 25mm/3.5
Simple.

 

[bayernfan]

Cagney approves.

Film: Picture Snatcher (1933)

 

[David Hughes]

And you'll need an exposure meter...

And you'll need an exposure meter...

Well, I still think people need meters; especially if you are new to film and elderly cameras.

I managed without for years but I was using B&W film then and FP3 had a fairly wide latitude and I was doing the corrections to my poor guesses in the darkroom later on, after school.

It was a great leap forwards when I got a meter and an even bigger one when I got it built into the camera. For me the peak was TTL and CW, which is why I love the Leica CL, M6 and M9...

It takes a long time to sort out and learn all the variations that are involved in judging or (at first) guessing the correct exposure and you waste a lot of film doing it, unless you restrict yourself to commonplace everyday photography. Far better in my experience to start with a meter (and a notebook) and RTFM.

Once experience has been gained you can start going without but that's not where you should start. And a few poor/bad experiences might put you off old Leicas and film for ever; to say nothing about the shots you'll be missing while you are learning.

And if people tell you about "sunny 16", you should bear in mind that it should be "sunny 8" in mid-winter and "sunny 11" in autumn and spring*. These factors have been measured carefully since the 1930's and are well established by now although no one seems to know/agree what an "average" subject is...

This is an unpopular view but I'm sticking to it.

Regards, David


* To add to the confusion the early Leica cameras did not have f/16, 11 or 8 as they used the "German" scale and - but unlike modern cameras - they do let you use 200 ASA or ISO film. An old Weston Euro Master meter would cover it all without all the maths.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Of course David is right that technically it is better to use a meter. However, with these old cameras the question is how precise the shutters are. That is why I suggest to use only 1/100 of a second. At 1/500 and 1/200 the slit beween the curtains is very small, so there will be almost always tapering. At 1/100 the chance of getting an even exposure is better.

The choice of the f/stop is smaller then too. Modern B+W film has an enormous exposure latitude. You can't go wrong. At 1/100 it makes no difference if you choose f/4 or f/11. You'll always get a printable negative. The effect of the f/stop is much bigger on the dept of field than it is on the printability of the negative.

Leica III, Elmar 50mm f/3.5 nickel, TMY2-400/Adox MCC 110.


Erik.

 

[HuubL]

Not that I'd ever use it but some old Barnacks allow flash.
Shawn

These were converted in the 1950s from pre war IIIa originals. Everything on the outside is 1950's. I have one in chrome and one in black, and they are wonderful cameras.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/huubl/34454619084/in/album-72157594225941403/

 

[David Hughes]

Well, um, I use all the speeds going and don't have problems but I'll cross my fingers next time.


As for printing, you need a lot of experience to print and that's the problem for newcomers. Add in that there are few good labs about that people can afford for individual wet D&P-ing and I'm sticking to what I said.


But if you are not a newcomer then I'll add that I agree with Erik.


Regards, David

 

[jcb4718]

It's amazing what you can get away with in terms of exposure settings. I have 4 Barnaks and even after a service the shutter speeds are not particularly accurate. Anything from 0-0.5 stops over is typical PLUS 0-0.5 stops taper. Sometimes, particularly at 1/500th, the overexposure on one side of the negative nudges 1 stop! Even so, I have never noticed any effect on a print. If you have an average overexposure you just get a dense negative and the print exposure has to be longer. Underexposure is a different matter if its so great that you lose shadow detail ('expose for the shadows, print for the highlights' is the well known mantra). You can still get a print, you just lose contrast. I use a hand held light meter but usually just to get an idea of the exposure and usually when I am not about to take a photo. If conditions change e.g. cloud cover arrives, I check again. After a while you get an idea of what the day is doing.