Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
You're wrong. the winner is The Epson R-D1 (because of the lever)
Ah yes ... but then in post #16 he stated:
Covering all bases I think they call it in the US!
... Covering all bases...
The handling of an M9 is as close to a film Leica that is equipped with a Motor Winder as to make the use of the lever unnecessary...
I like the M8.
The M9 corrects the IR sensitivity issue, lenses have the same FOV as with the Film cameras, and it can store a truly uncompressed RAW image.
The handling of an M9 is as close to a film Leica that is equipped with a Motor Winder as to make the use of the lever unnecessary...
I like the M8.
The M9 corrects the IR sensitivity issue, lenses have the same FOV as with the Film cameras, and it can store a truly uncompressed RAW image.
Last edited:
v_roma
Well-known
I think a couple of people touched on this. For me, it is also a matter of digital being free (in the sense of almost never being limited by how many pictures you can fit in current memory cards) but also the chimping. After all, with digital, you just freely snap away and review on the LCD until you get what you want. With film, there are only so many shots you are going to take of the same thing since you don't have the immediate feedback so you have to be more thoughtful (and cautious/cheap). That is why I am almost always happier with my film shots even though I may shoot a lot more digital pictures. I've been thinking lately about how to translate the film shooting experience into digital and I really think that if I somehow find the discipline not to chimp, I might be a step closer to that and happier with the results. It's just so tempting to look...
back alley
IMAGES
once again, i am amazed at how normal photographers can be turned into speed freaks, shooting away willy nilly by a digital sensor!
fyi, i actually shoot less with digital than i did when shooting film, why? i have no need to 'finish the roll' so i could process it.
so, if out and about now, if i shoot 3 frames and then head home i feel no anxiety at having to wait to see what i shot or waste the film by processing half a roll...
fyi, i actually shoot less with digital than i did when shooting film, why? i have no need to 'finish the roll' so i could process it.
so, if out and about now, if i shoot 3 frames and then head home i feel no anxiety at having to wait to see what i shot or waste the film by processing half a roll...
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I'm still amazed at this idea that having limits (ie. a single roll of film) somehow inspires creativity, etc.
For me, having a digital camera means I'm free to shoot whatever I want. I can see the results there in the field. I can modify them. I can decide a photo really isn't translating like I thought it would. I can make it better. It's like having a darkroom there with me.
And that makes me a better photographer.
All I really miss about film is the nostalgia. I spent nearly 20 years lugging film canisters around with me. I guess it's my version of the "the good old days." Of course, the good old days weren't always as great as we remember them to be....
For me, having a digital camera means I'm free to shoot whatever I want. I can see the results there in the field. I can modify them. I can decide a photo really isn't translating like I thought it would. I can make it better. It's like having a darkroom there with me.
And that makes me a better photographer.
All I really miss about film is the nostalgia. I spent nearly 20 years lugging film canisters around with me. I guess it's my version of the "the good old days." Of course, the good old days weren't always as great as we remember them to be....
back alley
IMAGES
after more than 30 years in the darkroom the 'magic' is long gone for me.
i much prefer the luxury of my big chair in front of my computer, working in a well ventilated or heated room, music playing...
i much prefer the luxury of my big chair in front of my computer, working in a well ventilated or heated room, music playing...
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I still feel sad for all of the new/young photographers who will never get to experience the thrill of seeing an image appear on a piece of paper in a developing tray.
Waiting for Photoshop to open on the desktop just isn't quite as magical.
Waiting for Photoshop to open on the desktop just isn't quite as magical.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Ah .. but sitting there listening to the whine of the Epson scanner, waiting for the image to appear on the screen is kind of fun!
What we miss most about film is getting the roll of film back and passing around prints while having coffee. Last week was the first "all-digital" trip, and I could upload all of the images to my Sister's computer before coming home. As far as shooting lots of images: I did about the same number with the M9 as I would with the Canon P or M3.
The "novelty" of a digital camera wore off on me in the 1990's. I like the quick check on the screen to verify an image, but I also carried a Polaroid with me when shooting a wedding or other volunteer shoot. Using the LCD is no different than carrying the Polaroid 180 or SLR680. It allows a quick check.
For the OP: the difference between a digital RF is much closer to the experience of using the M2 than it is to a P&S. If you did not like the M8 that you tried out, it is obvious that you prefer the film experience. Stick with it. Use it instead of the P&S, use the P&S like I would use the Polaroid. Check the setup, use the M2 after verifying it.
I do not miss the whine of the Epson scanner. Or the Microtek 1850. But the latter is great for Black and White scanning: it uses a monochrome sensor, and required three passes for color. No aliasing on B&W scans!
The "novelty" of a digital camera wore off on me in the 1990's. I like the quick check on the screen to verify an image, but I also carried a Polaroid with me when shooting a wedding or other volunteer shoot. Using the LCD is no different than carrying the Polaroid 180 or SLR680. It allows a quick check.
For the OP: the difference between a digital RF is much closer to the experience of using the M2 than it is to a P&S. If you did not like the M8 that you tried out, it is obvious that you prefer the film experience. Stick with it. Use it instead of the P&S, use the P&S like I would use the Polaroid. Check the setup, use the M2 after verifying it.
I do not miss the whine of the Epson scanner. Or the Microtek 1850. But the latter is great for Black and White scanning: it uses a monochrome sensor, and required three passes for color. No aliasing on B&W scans!
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I guess somebody using a large format camera and verifying his setup with a Polaroid would be frowned upon for chimping his shot? You can find all kinds of excuses for not liking something. Turns out, to me at least, that this is just another film vs digital thread. There nothing wrong with preferring one thing over the other and you don't have to justify it to anyone but yourself.
Bob
Bob
GSNfan
Well-known
What is the difference if you're shooting the same subject?
What is the difference between snapshots and serious photos of the same wedding?
I think this is an important question that needs to be answered before going to gear-talk.
zvos1
Well-known
I think a couple of people touched on this. For me, it is also a matter of digital being free (in the sense of almost never being limited by how many pictures you can fit in current memory cards) but also the chimping. After all, with digital, you just freely snap away and review on the LCD until you get what you want. With film, there are only so many shots you are going to take of the same thing since you don't have the immediate feedback so you have to be more thoughtful (and cautious/cheap). That is why I am almost always happier with my film shots even though I may shoot a lot more digital pictures. I've been thinking lately about how to translate the film shooting experience into digital and I really think that if I somehow find the discipline not to chimp, I might be a step closer to that and happier with the results. It's just so tempting to look...
Chimping was my biggest problem with digital as well. What I do these days is turn the LCD on my Panasonic G1 in to face the camera and review the image on EVF without taking my eyes of the viewfinder. It is still technically chimping but I like it much better.
rpilottx
Established
Snapshots vs Photos and Thoughts on Perfection
Snapshots vs Photos and Thoughts on Perfection
Snapshots are to post on "Facebook". Serious photos are to be printed and hung on a wall. I shoot more of the first while wishing they were more of the second as I suspect most of us do.
My main problem with the M8.2 was not the digital characteristics of the camera. In fact, combining Leica lenses, the rangefinder and and LED made for a nice combination. My problem was the amount of noise in the camera above ISO 600 and just a bit of the "crop factor" and my problem with the Nikon D7000 was the size combined with the zoom lens.
I may pick up a Leica M9 if I decide my hobby of photography is becoming a bit more important. I developed my first black and white photo in high school in 1966 and have carried a camera since then. However, I have other interests as well and so far I have been happy with film for the amount of shooting I do.
Perfection is a Leica M, Nikon F or Blad, loaded with Kodachrome 64 or TriX. Unfortunately, the days of Kodachrome are over and I don't know how much longer TriX will be around. However, I suspect it will be here after I am gone.
Snapshots vs Photos and Thoughts on Perfection
Snapshots are to post on "Facebook". Serious photos are to be printed and hung on a wall. I shoot more of the first while wishing they were more of the second as I suspect most of us do.
My main problem with the M8.2 was not the digital characteristics of the camera. In fact, combining Leica lenses, the rangefinder and and LED made for a nice combination. My problem was the amount of noise in the camera above ISO 600 and just a bit of the "crop factor" and my problem with the Nikon D7000 was the size combined with the zoom lens.
I may pick up a Leica M9 if I decide my hobby of photography is becoming a bit more important. I developed my first black and white photo in high school in 1966 and have carried a camera since then. However, I have other interests as well and so far I have been happy with film for the amount of shooting I do.
Perfection is a Leica M, Nikon F or Blad, loaded with Kodachrome 64 or TriX. Unfortunately, the days of Kodachrome are over and I don't know how much longer TriX will be around. However, I suspect it will be here after I am gone.
My biggest thing is that low end digitals and P&S digitals don't have a mechanical shutter and that feeling is what I miss. As long as my digital camera has a real shutter, I feel good about it. The M8.2 is more enjoyable for me than my M3.
No, No, No....
Mcary
Well-known
None as far as I'm concern
When I'm doing a shoot I'll often shoot 35mm with my M6 for the first hour and then digital for the second hour with my M8 and the frame count for each hour is generally pretty close, same goes with shooting candids.
In fact for me there is so little difference between using an M8 and M6 that I've decided to sell the M8 and go back to shooting 100% film, of course the fact that I also like shooting MF film played some part in the decision