Hephaestus
Established
hamustar,
The great thing about vintage Leica glass is that it continues to hold its value. Because of this, you can try out some "character" lenses at little financial risk. Be aware, though, that older lenses are often not quite as as forgiving, particularly regarding flare, as modern lenses. In such cases, there is a tradeoff for that unique look.
Enjoy the process!
Best regards,
Ryan
bo_lorentzen
Established
Thank you for defining what a "domestic photographer" is. I do have a LED unit, and have used it for commercial shots, but I don't particularly think it would work for me in a home setting. I do agree that it is a very interesting light source, and that the variable light is interesting for fill.
You should not own lenses which you are uncomfortable taking to a shoot.
Choices in aperture have got to be rooted in personal taste.? and comfort level using these lenses.?
Strangely I'm a lot more concerned walking down the street in Madrid than in New Delhi.
Politely, I think I have to agree with those posters saying there is room to disagree on some of these points.
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
You should not own lenses which you are uncomfortable taking to a shoot.
Choices in aperture have got to be rooted in personal taste.? and comfort level using these lenses.?
Strangely I'm a lot more concerned walking down the street in Madrid than in New Delhi.
Politely, I think I have to agree with those posters saying there is room to disagree on some of these points.
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
Hephaestus
Established
ederek,
The 24mm Summilux is a painful piece of glass for me. I wish that I was unimpressed with it. I simply don't like the idea of photographing with a lens which cost me nearly $6000. But for the way in which i like to shoot casual, indoor, low-light portraits at a distance usually of no more three feet, I am aware of no lens which works better. It takes in enough light that I can almost always keep the shutter speed to at least 1/15th in a dimly lit kitchen, while shooting at 320 on my M8 or with BW400CN in my MP. It provides enough depth of field while wide open at that range that I don't have to be exactly bang on with my focus, while offering plenty of bokeh which pleases my eye.
About the highest praise that I can give to such a lens is fact that I actually feel compelled rather than reluctant to use it. I was often hesitant to shoot with my Noctilux, for fear of scratching such a precious lens. Even though its was more expensive still, I hold no such reservation in using the 24mm Summilux. I use it and carry it regularly. If something ever happens to my copy, despite the horrendous cost, I would absolutely replace it as soon as possible.
Your mileage may vary, but for me the wide Lux is a key piece of kit.
Best regards,
Ryan
ederek
Well-known
Either the extra stop in shutter speed or lower ISO is a reason for the 1.4 vs. a 2.0 (to earlier comment, even given a significant $ premium). It's seems the most demanding applications are away from the home environment and that's where I typically need the little extra that the premium lenses provide. I'd like to try the 24 lux, but it may be a bit wide for me as I'm not very comfortable with the 21mm at present. Just need to convince myself I need the 35lux...
Last edited:
bo_lorentzen
Established
ederek, you "need" the new 35lux... really, it nails focus like crazy, have never used a 35mm which wack the ball so hard as long as I set it up right.
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
mfogiel
Veteran
Ryan,
Thanks for an interesting summary.
NEW VS OLD LENSES
I am a bit surprized, that you gliss over the older, lower contrast Leica lenses if you shoot digital, but I guess it could be because you shoot colour. For a film B&W photographer, I feel that often in a trade off between max sharpness and a more gradual palette of greys, I prefer the older lenses with all their limitations. Mind you, I own most of the Zeiss ZM line as well.
SOFT RELEASE
Whenever I tried to use one, invariably I've ended up shooting too many blank frames by error while carrying the camera around, I have yet to see if it improves the low speed results.
LENS CHOICE
I feel that a 15mm lens for shooting from the hip is too wide on film, my favourite FL for that is a 25mm. I also find that 28mm is a very versatile FL, and one you do not mention. I have tried several 28mm lenses, and eventually bought a Summicron, which I find amazing at full aperture, particularly when I shoot night scenes with lights. My favourite FL is the 50mm, and
I use several lenses there depending on needs. My ideal lens would have the contrast and rendering of a DR Summicron, with sharpness that this lens exhibits at f5.6 extending up to f 1.4 ( I shoot exclusively B&W film), however for portraiture, there is nothing in my opinion, that can beat the C Sonnar.
28 Summicron
DR Summicron
C Sonnar
Thanks for an interesting summary.
NEW VS OLD LENSES
I am a bit surprized, that you gliss over the older, lower contrast Leica lenses if you shoot digital, but I guess it could be because you shoot colour. For a film B&W photographer, I feel that often in a trade off between max sharpness and a more gradual palette of greys, I prefer the older lenses with all their limitations. Mind you, I own most of the Zeiss ZM line as well.
SOFT RELEASE
Whenever I tried to use one, invariably I've ended up shooting too many blank frames by error while carrying the camera around, I have yet to see if it improves the low speed results.
LENS CHOICE
I feel that a 15mm lens for shooting from the hip is too wide on film, my favourite FL for that is a 25mm. I also find that 28mm is a very versatile FL, and one you do not mention. I have tried several 28mm lenses, and eventually bought a Summicron, which I find amazing at full aperture, particularly when I shoot night scenes with lights. My favourite FL is the 50mm, and
I use several lenses there depending on needs. My ideal lens would have the contrast and rendering of a DR Summicron, with sharpness that this lens exhibits at f5.6 extending up to f 1.4 ( I shoot exclusively B&W film), however for portraiture, there is nothing in my opinion, that can beat the C Sonnar.
28 Summicron
DR Summicron
C Sonnar
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Ryan,
I am so glad that you took my disagreement in the spirit in which it was offered, viz., that there had been no replies so far and that I do not pretend to be 'right' while you are 'wrong'. Are you familiar with the cod etymology of 'expert'? It allegedly comes from 'ex' meaning 'a has-been' and 'spurt', meaning 'a drip under pressure.' Neither of us, I think, would wish to claim to be experts.
You are (sort of) right about my not distinguishing between film and digital. I use both, and I bought my most notoriously 'characterful' lens, the Thambar, specifically to use on the M8 (and now of course on the M9). I completely take your point about being easier to 'fake' effects in digital, and about their being no moral difference. It's just that (a) I'd far rather get the image in-camera than, as I put it, piddle around in software, and (b) the results are still different, and I prefer the in-camera result.
Likewise with half cases. Sure, I don't have to change batteries and memory cards as often as film, but I still have to change them, and I have an almost phobic reaction to the idea of the time wasted in removing and replacing the case. Also, I find cases destroy the compactness of the camera.
I have had gear stolen, in India and Russia, but not for a long time, and my argument is this. Theft is almost invariably opportunistic, and they don't have time to look at what they're stealing, whether it's a brand-new M9 or a 40-year old Nikkormat. The important thing to remember is that to a thief, everything is free, so whatever he can get for it is pure profit. The thief sizes you up, not your camera, and considers his chances of getting away with it -- just as you size up the person to whom you hand your camera.
Again, thanks for initiating the discussion, and for taking my disagreement in good part.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear John,
Maybe I have very average hands, or maybe they're unusually flexible, but I find that with every camera on which I've tried a soft release, most especially Leicas and Nikons, my finger falls more naturally on the release at its designed height than on a soft release. These always feel to me as if there is a smokestack on top of the lens, just as a new dental filling feels as if you have Mount Everest in your mouth. The rest of the finger rests naturally on the camera without the release: with the release, it feels as if I am poking the release from a distance instead of pressing it naturally.
No doubt there is a huge psychological component in this, but then, there's a huge psychological component in releasing the shutter smoothly anyway. Also, I've never had to buy a soft release -- I've always been given them, either as a journalist or as a friend -- so I don't have to justify the choice or the price to myself, or persuade myself they do something they don't. I'm perfectly prepared to believe that they work for many, or they wouldn't go on selling, but I just can't see how.
I feel terribly disloyal to Tom, who very kindly gave me one of his soft releases, but for me they just don't work at all. This reminds me, though, that I dislike most bolt-on goodies except viewfinders (a necessary evil) and rapid winders. I have a Leicavit on my MP, the Voigtländer equivalent on my R2 and one of Tom's winders on my M2, and I have to say that Tom's is probably the best. Oh: and I have a rewind crank on my M2. But Thumbs Up (sp?), hand grips, half cases, electric motor drives and winders: as far as I am concerned, all they do is to make the camera bulkier and less pleasant to use.
Cheers,
R.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
While you are right about the effect, I have my doubts about the cause. The age pyramid works so that only a minority of slum inhabitants have ever seen anything other than a digital, and those that once did probably will not remember it. I concur that a Leica or indeed anything film not looking like a late generation AF SLR is less likely to be stolen than any digital compact since its outdated (outdated even for the average 40+ person) looks make it look as if you were impoverished or mental, and the camera not worth stealing - but a half case won't change that one way or another.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
I agree, with the exception of the F2 (and presumably all other cameras that copied that metering prism design) - there, I've always liked the release extender (AR-1) as it keeps release and time knob at finger level. No matter of softness or camera shake - but for me it makes eyelevel operation more easy than having the release a cm below the time knob.
jarski
Veteran
this was exactly my thinking before starting my round the world trip that am now on, and using M8 as main camera, two CV lenses and one ZM. compared to normal tourist snapshoot cameras, for me its still pretty expensive kit (bought M8 used, begin of this year), and would kick myself to butt for few days if something happened to it.
I am heading to the world, 15-20 countries, will see
interesting, perhaps our paths cross, "its a small world"
cant wait to see your M9 photos from along the way. know already the route ?
Last edited:
bo_lorentzen
Established
Ryan,
>>If you’re like me, you might actually find that Voigtlander lenses will often produce superior results for you because you are more inclined to use them casually.
Is there not another component here.? "the best lens is the one on the camera" when shooting for fun, walking down the street etc, I have taken to leaving at home the camerabag for the simple reason that I find myself being significantly more productive with one lens on my camera. Whatever lens is on the camera will (should) produce superior results simply because that is the one getting used.
If we took the price factor out of the equation, and you became comfortable using your top M lenses casually, then these might both turn out to be awesome lenses and produce some of your favorite images.?
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
>>If you’re like me, you might actually find that Voigtlander lenses will often produce superior results for you because you are more inclined to use them casually.
Is there not another component here.? "the best lens is the one on the camera" when shooting for fun, walking down the street etc, I have taken to leaving at home the camerabag for the simple reason that I find myself being significantly more productive with one lens on my camera. Whatever lens is on the camera will (should) produce superior results simply because that is the one getting used.
If we took the price factor out of the equation, and you became comfortable using your top M lenses casually, then these might both turn out to be awesome lenses and produce some of your favorite images.?
Bo
www.bophoto.typepad.com
Hephaestus
Established
Bo,
We may certainly reasonably disagree, but I find myself in agreement with much of what you wrote.
As for the LED pannel for lighting, it is certainly very limited. I have found that adding the single low power light is often enough to give me that extra stop or so I need, and it may also even out some harsh shadows on a face while providing something of a catch light, and so I often find it worthwhile to carry one. It is, admittedly, a weak compromise at this stage of the technology.
mfogiel,
LED Lights:
I admittedly did not address the possibility of shooting digital to make black and white images. You have achieved beautiful tonality in the images that you have shared here, and you have clearly put together a system which is working very well!
15mm:
The focal length that I really prefer the look of on the street is 21mm. While that works out reasonably well on the M8 with the sensor size crop, I still in practice tend to almost exclusively use my 15mm when I'm using my MP. The key difference is the incredible depth of field that the 15mm offers. I'll say more about this below.
Softrelease
While I find that the soft release does facilitate steady shooting at lower shutter speeds by allowing me to hold the camera differently and more firmly, the real boon of its design for me is that it allows me to more easily trip the shutter with my thumb. This becomes important to be because of the way that I tend to photograph on the street. Again, see below.
My use of the 15mm + Softrelease for street photography:
For me, the Softrelease and 15mm lens creates a package which allows me to shoot in a way that I otherwise would not be able to. The vast majority of my street images are taken with the 15mm lens zone focused at f4.5 or f5.6 to get everything from about arms length to infinity. This is made possible, at these apertures, by the tremendous depth of field of the 15mm lens.
I then hold the camera at belt level, with my pinky tucked under the camera to help support the weight, my hand wrapped firmly around the grip lump on the half case (on my MP I ditch the half-case for a Rapidgrip), and my thumb on the Softrelease-attached shutter. When I take an image, I do not stop walking.
Because I'm still walking briskly when I take many of my images, I need to keep the shutter speed up. Apperently, I don't walk very smoothly, because anything less than 1/180th is virtually hopeless. The threshold for reliably sharp images is usually 1/320 for me.
On an overcast day, I find that I generally need to set the aperture at f4.5 or f5.6 to get the sort of shutter speed that I want when shooting on 400 speed film or sensor-setting. This is no problem on the 15mm lens where I can get everything out from about arms length at f4.5. Not so, on a 21mm lens, unfortunately.
I don't stop, I don't make eye contact, I don't look through the viewfinder, and I don't re-focus. I simply walk around casually, looking as though I'm simply carrying my camera at my side, and I depress the shutter with my thumb when I am interested. I get very close, but the vast majority of people don't even know that an image was taken (this works much better in busy places, mind you). When image sensors get better and I become comfortable exposing at ~1600, I'll consider trading the 15mm for a 21mm at f8.0 or f9.5. But until then the 15mm will be by go-to street lens.
I expect that most people would not be comfortable photographing in this way. Admittedly, it is inherently sneaky. I am not yet convinced that it is immoral, however, and I deeply enjoy the child-like perspective of the resulting images. I will try to find some images to post which may illustrate the perspective.
Best regards,
Ryan
We may certainly reasonably disagree, but I find myself in agreement with much of what you wrote.
As for the LED pannel for lighting, it is certainly very limited. I have found that adding the single low power light is often enough to give me that extra stop or so I need, and it may also even out some harsh shadows on a face while providing something of a catch light, and so I often find it worthwhile to carry one. It is, admittedly, a weak compromise at this stage of the technology.
mfogiel,
LED Lights:
I admittedly did not address the possibility of shooting digital to make black and white images. You have achieved beautiful tonality in the images that you have shared here, and you have clearly put together a system which is working very well!
15mm:
The focal length that I really prefer the look of on the street is 21mm. While that works out reasonably well on the M8 with the sensor size crop, I still in practice tend to almost exclusively use my 15mm when I'm using my MP. The key difference is the incredible depth of field that the 15mm offers. I'll say more about this below.
Softrelease
While I find that the soft release does facilitate steady shooting at lower shutter speeds by allowing me to hold the camera differently and more firmly, the real boon of its design for me is that it allows me to more easily trip the shutter with my thumb. This becomes important to be because of the way that I tend to photograph on the street. Again, see below.
My use of the 15mm + Softrelease for street photography:
For me, the Softrelease and 15mm lens creates a package which allows me to shoot in a way that I otherwise would not be able to. The vast majority of my street images are taken with the 15mm lens zone focused at f4.5 or f5.6 to get everything from about arms length to infinity. This is made possible, at these apertures, by the tremendous depth of field of the 15mm lens.
I then hold the camera at belt level, with my pinky tucked under the camera to help support the weight, my hand wrapped firmly around the grip lump on the half case (on my MP I ditch the half-case for a Rapidgrip), and my thumb on the Softrelease-attached shutter. When I take an image, I do not stop walking.
Because I'm still walking briskly when I take many of my images, I need to keep the shutter speed up. Apperently, I don't walk very smoothly, because anything less than 1/180th is virtually hopeless. The threshold for reliably sharp images is usually 1/320 for me.
On an overcast day, I find that I generally need to set the aperture at f4.5 or f5.6 to get the sort of shutter speed that I want when shooting on 400 speed film or sensor-setting. This is no problem on the 15mm lens where I can get everything out from about arms length at f4.5. Not so, on a 21mm lens, unfortunately.
I don't stop, I don't make eye contact, I don't look through the viewfinder, and I don't re-focus. I simply walk around casually, looking as though I'm simply carrying my camera at my side, and I depress the shutter with my thumb when I am interested. I get very close, but the vast majority of people don't even know that an image was taken (this works much better in busy places, mind you). When image sensors get better and I become comfortable exposing at ~1600, I'll consider trading the 15mm for a 21mm at f8.0 or f9.5. But until then the 15mm will be by go-to street lens.
I expect that most people would not be comfortable photographing in this way. Admittedly, it is inherently sneaky. I am not yet convinced that it is immoral, however, and I deeply enjoy the child-like perspective of the resulting images. I will try to find some images to post which may illustrate the perspective.
Best regards,
Ryan
Hephaestus
Established
Roger,
I value the discussion, and I particularly appreciate input from such experienced photographers as yourself. We may not come to see eye to eye, but I nonetheless grow by becoming aware of your perspective. Thank you for continuing to engage with me.
Best regards,
Ryan
P.S. Upon learning of the etymology of "expert", I now feel much more comfortable in claiming that designation!
I value the discussion, and I particularly appreciate input from such experienced photographers as yourself. We may not come to see eye to eye, but I nonetheless grow by becoming aware of your perspective. Thank you for continuing to engage with me.
Best regards,
Ryan
P.S. Upon learning of the etymology of "expert", I now feel much more comfortable in claiming that designation!
Hephaestus
Established
sevo,
Our perceptions on this issue remain in disagreement. Fair enough! I will not continue to defend myself on the potential merits of half cases or of altering the appearance of a camera, as the arguments have been made and I suspect that we may better continue to learn by moving onto debate other issues. Thank you for making your views so clear on this topic! I look forward to exploring the next one!
Best regards,
Ryan
Hephaestus
Established
Bo,
You are quite right: this is a separate point. You are also correct in suggesting that if I were able to consistently treat my Leica lenses in the same way that I treat some of my Voigtlander lenses, they would produce images of equal and often indeed better quality. Unfortunately, it is a psychological fact about me that I am reluctant to use a more expensive item for a job when I know that I could get similar results by using and risking a much less expensive one. This is certainly not to say, though, that everyone has the same issue!
Best regards,
Ryan
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
This is sound advice, to which I'd add that the less stuff you carry the easier it is to keep an eye on.
Hephaestus
Established
I am traveling at the moment, and do not have access to the bulk of my photographs. However, I attach the following low quality images to show the sort of perspective which I aim for when photographing up close and from the hip.
I hope that these images, such as they are, will show the sort of childlike perspective which I hope to achieve by photographing in this way. For a description of the method that I use, please refer to post #34.
Best regards,
Ryan
I hope that these images, such as they are, will show the sort of childlike perspective which I hope to achieve by photographing in this way. For a description of the method that I use, please refer to post #34.
Best regards,
Ryan
Sparrow
Veteran
Hephaestus
Established
Hello Stewart,
Thats a fun moment that you've captured! I must say that my ratty looking Leica wouldn't look nearly so nice in her hands: a serious downside to my suggestion of roughing up the appearance of a kit!
Would you share some more about the photo? That sort of image is exactly what I hope for when I try to work in a domestic context.
Thanks for sharing!
Best regards,
Ryan
Thats a fun moment that you've captured! I must say that my ratty looking Leica wouldn't look nearly so nice in her hands: a serious downside to my suggestion of roughing up the appearance of a kit!
Would you share some more about the photo? That sort of image is exactly what I hope for when I try to work in a domestic context.
Thanks for sharing!
Best regards,
Ryan