johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Ha, no LensRentals at my end, I'm in the Netherlands... But thanks anyway! 
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Johan, I have those cameras (M4, IIIc, 2.8D) and keep them because I can currently afford to do so. Also, each has at least one thing it does better than the others. (In the case of the Rolleiflex, it's the most recent acquisition of these, which gives it precedence, and that Planar has given me 6 or 7 images I cannot imagine I'd get from the M or GXR/M.)
But the GXR still spends far more time in the bag than the others. My decades away from film have something to do with this--I make no more errors shooting film than digital, but the exposures that have to be thrown away are more costly than hitting the Delete button. The GXR teaches me my errors more swiftly and continuously, so I'm a little better the next time I take along the M4 or Rollei.
The other simple reason I keep those 3 cameras you named is their being utterly mechanical. I'm as skeptical as anyone about the durability/ repairability of computerized instruments....
But the GXR still spends far more time in the bag than the others. My decades away from film have something to do with this--I make no more errors shooting film than digital, but the exposures that have to be thrown away are more costly than hitting the Delete button. The GXR teaches me my errors more swiftly and continuously, so I'm a little better the next time I take along the M4 or Rollei.
The other simple reason I keep those 3 cameras you named is their being utterly mechanical. I'm as skeptical as anyone about the durability/ repairability of computerized instruments....
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I use my GXR alongside a CL, M4-2, M9, Balda Baldix, Voigtländer Perkeo II, and Voigtländer Bessa III now, as well as an Olympus E-1. The GXR is the most versatile camera of the bunch, but no GXR can present the look that a full frame digital does, or a full frame film camera does, and certainly not what a medium format does.
- The Olympus E-1 I keep around specifically to use for longer focal length, narrower field of view hand-held. That is what an SLR's forte is. Its smaller format and responsiveness makes it a natural for shooting subjects in motion at a distance. I fit it most of the time with either an Olympus 35mm Macro lens (70mm eq) or a Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 (170mm eq) which do just what I like with it.
- The Ms and CL are rangefinder cameras, not TTL viewing cameras. They work differently, and that is useful to me a good bit of the time. They're also FF 35mm film format.
- 6x6 medium format film is unto itself a totally different seeing and shooting experience.
But the GXR can do a lot all by itself. It's compact, quiet, very adaptable, and produces image quality that for my purposes is right on par with the M9. It is a smaller format, so that nets a smaller, lighter, faster system with more DoF.
G
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Dear Bill,
after reading all the posts in the thread I am leaning towards getting myself a GXR.
About a year ago I went the way of the Nikon D3100, with legacy glass and all-manual workflow. Got myself the 18-55 VR kit lens for reportage work that needs AF. But, I'm bothered by having to carry two systems since I generally do not leave my Leica + 1 or 2 lenses at home. Getting a GXR would eliminate that, I would be able to carry a single set of lenses and two small bodies, possibly one AF lens to the GXR.
What is your opinion on using the GXR for professional work? I'll hopefully launch myself as a (semi-)professional photographer and editorial writer early next year and would love to hear what you think of using the GXR as a sole digital body for professional work.
after reading all the posts in the thread I am leaning towards getting myself a GXR.
About a year ago I went the way of the Nikon D3100, with legacy glass and all-manual workflow. Got myself the 18-55 VR kit lens for reportage work that needs AF. But, I'm bothered by having to carry two systems since I generally do not leave my Leica + 1 or 2 lenses at home. Getting a GXR would eliminate that, I would be able to carry a single set of lenses and two small bodies, possibly one AF lens to the GXR.
What is your opinion on using the GXR for professional work? I'll hopefully launch myself as a (semi-)professional photographer and editorial writer early next year and would love to hear what you think of using the GXR as a sole digital body for professional work.
Tom Diaz
Well-known
I usually don't go out on the same day with the GXR and my Leica M6TTL, but I have and use both. I'm not selling my M6 any time soon, although I worry that film may disappear sooner that I thought it would! (And, it'll get a lot more expensive before it disappears, I suppose.)
I do not have the particular lenses you ask about, but I do use a 35mm Summicron and 50mm Summicron. I'm very happy and feel that the GXR gets the quality out of them that I expect. I also use a 21mm Voigtlander on it, giving the equivalent of about a 32mm. It's great, too, although I find myself wishing I had a faster 21mm. As the title of this thread suggests, it's a new camera that does justice to old lenses!
Maybe I'm stating the obvious, but your Leica M will give you less depth of field with your Summiluxes, which you may like. With good film it would have the edge in pure image quality, too, since we're comparing an APS-C sensor with a full frame. I also own a 6x6 twin-lens reflex that I hardly ever use, because I don't love the quality improvement enough to put up with the extra hassle of dealing with 6x6 film. Mine isn't worth as much as your Rolleis, but if it were, I'd sell the 6x6 equipment and keep the Leica.
Tom
Bill Pierce
Well-known
“Professional work” is a pretty big category. Although the sensor is 12MG and not the most recent, I find that, thanks to the lack of AA filter and a sensor tuned to the needs of the short body to flange distance of rangefinder lenses, with good glass and good shooting technique, the image quality far exceeds the needs of print or web journalism. My standard portfolio print is on 17x22 paper, and I have no problem whatsoever with the GXR at that size. (I’m not doing architectural or product shots, but you probably aren’t either.)
As for autofocus, it doesn’t exist with the module for M mount lenses. (Probably the most compatable model with autofocus would be the camera unit with a 16 megapixel C sensor with an effective 24-85 mm zoom.) The magnified manual focus and focus peaking on the M mount model is very good. And there is always scale focusing with M mount lenses. Since you use a Leica, you already know if manual focusing limits the work you do and can make an equipment choice based on that.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Thank you Bill for your answer to my question.
I am planning to use the GXR for work that can be framed manually rather easily: musical concerts, funerals, editorial work and portraits to accompany interviews, maybe some commercial and business work. All to be put to use in print media and online.
The D3100 likely will persevere for the occasional product shot.
Also, I was thinking of using the GXR with a Micro-Nikkor 55mm lens and bellows to re-shoot my 35mm negatives so that I maybe can ditch my negative scanner too. In a thread on re-shooting negatives with a D800 I saw someone mention the GXR too, and real positive due to the lack of an AA-filter.
Anybody in for a Rolleiflex 2.8F in very good condition to fund my GXR? :angel:
I am planning to use the GXR for work that can be framed manually rather easily: musical concerts, funerals, editorial work and portraits to accompany interviews, maybe some commercial and business work. All to be put to use in print media and online.
The D3100 likely will persevere for the occasional product shot.
Also, I was thinking of using the GXR with a Micro-Nikkor 55mm lens and bellows to re-shoot my 35mm negatives so that I maybe can ditch my negative scanner too. In a thread on re-shooting negatives with a D800 I saw someone mention the GXR too, and real positive due to the lack of an AA-filter.
Anybody in for a Rolleiflex 2.8F in very good condition to fund my GXR? :angel:
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Anybody in for a Rolleiflex 2.8F in very good condition to fund my GXR? :angel:
Why not do the ebay thing, Johan? It appears that a 2.8F will raise more than enough money to fund a GXR-M.
Tom
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
Johan, the best Rolleiflexes seem to move pretty briskly in RFF classifieds. If it were me, I'd start here among the aficionados
Sounds like you got the journalist position you mentioned in Roger's Writing & Photography thread, yes? If so, congratulations.
The GXR is a great little tool with a value and versatility far beyond its cost.
Robert
Sounds like you got the journalist position you mentioned in Roger's Writing & Photography thread, yes? If so, congratulations.
The GXR is a great little tool with a value and versatility far beyond its cost.
Robert
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Hi Robert,
thank you for your advice on selling the Rolleiflex(es) here, I think you are absolutely correct. I'm still considering what to do, even though I do not use the Rolleiflexes that much, I love their quality whenever they do come out to shoot...
It's just that I have a lot of funds tied up in them (I own a 2.8F and a Tele) and could use that money, for a part to fund the GXR and for the rest... Well, that journalism job hasn't materialized yet, I've yet to hear anything back from the job application...
But I've grown more determined to land a writing and photographing job soon.
Maybe I should let go of the 2.8F and the D3100 with lenses, and keep the Tele
leicapixie
Well-known
reading the problem with "old" lenses on new sensors had me really worried till i remembered, the APS-C or whatever aint full frame!The edges, well more than an edge is gone..
Personally i'd love to use ALL my old lenses, but cannot unless i buy top end Nikons. MY Leica lenses need an M9,ME M-nothing whatever.The prices simply outrageous for the body, which is low on the DXO test pattern Canon EOS is a way with adapters.Time warp! Did that in '60's with T-Mount. No way, Jose!.I've read about tele-centric and have doubts.
Digital is quite satisfying using a point and shoot.Even for pro jobs..
Money saved is money mine.
Personally i'd love to use ALL my old lenses, but cannot unless i buy top end Nikons. MY Leica lenses need an M9,ME M-nothing whatever.The prices simply outrageous for the body, which is low on the DXO test pattern Canon EOS is a way with adapters.Time warp! Did that in '60's with T-Mount. No way, Jose!.I've read about tele-centric and have doubts.
Digital is quite satisfying using a point and shoot.Even for pro jobs..
Money saved is money mine.