Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Olsen,Olsen said:
Well, that is actually a difference of opinion between my wife and me. I'd rather have the Noctilux; she prefers the WATE (though we are both keen on the other's choice too). But the lens I REALLY want is a Thambar...
Then again, neither of us can stand whey cheeses. Full-cream goats' milk is one thing -- they make quite a lot of that around where we live -- but sheep cheeses are the all-time winners.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Olsen
Well-known
Roger,Roger Hicks said:
I helped a friend of mine who, at one point worked as a museum's curator here in Oslo, here to sort out a heep of hundreds of negatives from German soldiers that served here during WWII. Facinating work! (Most of the best negs were MF, though). The largest volume were girlfriends and family stuff, but some unique scenes in between. Like of this Luftwaffe crew, at Gardermoen Airport, Oslo, taken the winter 44/45.
Imagine the situation: The Red Army were rushing westwards and pockets of German troops were isolated here and there. Some were flown out of these pockets by plane. Like stormtroopers/elite soldiers that were flown out of the Kurland-pocket in the Baltics, to do the last stance in Berlin. Or to Norway. Luftwaffe units in Norway were doing this kind of work during this winter, - as long as it was possible. They had a large fleet of advanced Ju 188 reconnaisance bombers with preasure cabins, a very advanced feature of it's day, that could fly higher and faster than it's enemies. - The very few pictures that exists of this unique airoplane are from this very heap of negatives, by the way.
The scene on one of the photos:
The crew is gathered outside the plane, nervous faces, - one carries an automatic gun resembling or AG3 - a strange weapon for a Luftwaffe crew member to carry (to scare off desperate refugees?) and an officer with a Leica camera with this 'fat' tele lense. That was the first time I heard of the Thambar.
One can speculate on where that camera and lense ended up. Most likely the guys were shot down during take off or landing. Either over Kurland or Berlin were the Russians had total air superiority. When the losses grew and everybody understood that the war was lost, the Luftwaffe crews here in Norway gave up the evacuation. A decision met with bitterness and resentment of the many German soldiers who ended up in Russian captivity. The airforce, they are never there when you need them, are they.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Olsen,Olsen said:
Wow! That must indeed have been absolutely fascinating, and it renews my enthusiasm for a local project.
My house is the old servants' quarters for a big mansion next door that is now the Mairie (Town Hall for Americans). It would be fascinating to see pictures of the little square -- open on one side to the main street, the other side consisting of the Mairie, the old village school and the Donjon café-bar -- with the nazi flags hanging from it.
A few of my friends were in their 'teens during the Occupation, and also remember what else was where in the village in the 30s and 40s; for example, the left-hand side of my house (it was originally two cottages, with an alley in between) was once the local petrol station.
What I have in mind is a photo-record of the town as it is now (the exhibition would be in both the Mairie and Loudun), giving rise to a second (and much more interesting) exhibition of historical shots dug out of people's files. The family from whom we bought the house were originally refugees from Alsace/Elsaß.
Cheers,
R.
Thardy
Veteran
Olsen,
Last year on a general photo forum I posted my views on the same topic...."we don't need full frame sensors just wider lenses" or something like that.
Some people agreed, but concerning FF some mentioned less noise, DOF concerns, better tonality, and other stuff which I've forgotten now.
Canon has a zoom now that is 10mm at it's widest, but people still say it's ONLY 16mm on a "crop body" camera.
Last year on a general photo forum I posted my views on the same topic...."we don't need full frame sensors just wider lenses" or something like that.
Some people agreed, but concerning FF some mentioned less noise, DOF concerns, better tonality, and other stuff which I've forgotten now.
Canon has a zoom now that is 10mm at it's widest, but people still say it's ONLY 16mm on a "crop body" camera.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Thardy said:
There's also the question of using both film and digi. My 35/75 favourite combination on the MP becomes 47/100 on the M8 and I therefore need 24/50 to get the same angles of view...
Cheers,
R.
Olsen
Well-known
Roger Hicks said:
Sounds interesting: Your project; would it be a market for a book?
My friend, the ex.museum's curator, has a Master of History (author, journalist, teacher) and has written several books about local history, mostly WWII stuff. Several of them must have been real economical successes. His strongest side is the knowledge of the picture material, where to get it, etc. The rest has been pritty streight forward 'platitudes' about local WWII history dotted with witness descriptions and anectodets (Æhum! I hope he does not read this!).
When he did this project with all the negatives back in the mid/late70', the awareness about the material's value was 'total'. You risked being searched leaving the museum's premises. Not so just a few years earlier. He told me of, especially, British authors who 'borrowed' WWII negatives from Norwegian museum's and never turned them back again. Much of this picture material is unique and has a value on the copyright market today.
As late as 1970, when I did my military service, we slept in ex. German barracks, drank our coffee from mugs with the swastica in the bottom, Knives and forks had the German eagle stampted on them, - at this Gardermoen Airport which was a millitary airfield back then. We didn't think much of it at the time. Then all these 'replicas' started dissappearing. Today they are valuable collector's items. Negatives had a similar fate.
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Uh-oh, the "I don't need/want Full Frame" argument!
It's like deja vu all over again! ;-)
For the last 2 years this argument was a fixture of Nikon DSLR forums and now here it is on the Leica M8 forum.
I didn't think I needed FF until the D3 came along and it's high ISO performance trounced everything else and gave me back normal performance on my lenses.
Don't be TOO surprised if you change your minds about this -- as I did -- when FF becomes available (if it ever does).
It's like deja vu all over again! ;-)
For the last 2 years this argument was a fixture of Nikon DSLR forums and now here it is on the Leica M8 forum.
I didn't think I needed FF until the D3 came along and it's high ISO performance trounced everything else and gave me back normal performance on my lenses.
Don't be TOO surprised if you change your minds about this -- as I did -- when FF becomes available (if it ever does).
Olsen
Well-known
Some more WATE bashing. I am an amateur and do my photography in my spare time. Like on business trips that I do frequently around in Europe.
1)
A scene from Palermo? - There is a part of Palermo called Puerto Nuevo (The New Harbour), but this is from Nyhavn, which means the same thing, in Copenhagen, Denmark. Here some local hoods have a sit-down. Actually a small crop from a WATE shot with ISO1250 hand held. An occation i missed my Noctilux.
2)
Nyhavn, Copenhagen. Some 300 years ago, almost, the Norwegian/Danish 'sea hero' Tordenskjold lay here with his frigate 'Den Norske Løve' (The Norwegian Lion). Then the king came, walking his wives - he had two, one married to the right hand, the other to his left hand. He was raving mad too. The king asked; 'why do you have big holes in your sails, Tordenskjold?' 'The Swedes have shot holes in them, sir', he answered. He was promoted admiral on the spot, - the king had not heard of that any of his captains had been so close to the enemy before. Tordenskjold was 22....
The king died soon after in something resembling syphilis. Tordenskiold in a duel in Germany. He was to be only 29 years old. So, Nyhavn in Copenhagen isn't so 'new' after all.
1)
A scene from Palermo? - There is a part of Palermo called Puerto Nuevo (The New Harbour), but this is from Nyhavn, which means the same thing, in Copenhagen, Denmark. Here some local hoods have a sit-down. Actually a small crop from a WATE shot with ISO1250 hand held. An occation i missed my Noctilux.
2)
Nyhavn, Copenhagen. Some 300 years ago, almost, the Norwegian/Danish 'sea hero' Tordenskjold lay here with his frigate 'Den Norske Løve' (The Norwegian Lion). Then the king came, walking his wives - he had two, one married to the right hand, the other to his left hand. He was raving mad too. The king asked; 'why do you have big holes in your sails, Tordenskjold?' 'The Swedes have shot holes in them, sir', he answered. He was promoted admiral on the spot, - the king had not heard of that any of his captains had been so close to the enemy before. Tordenskjold was 22....
The king died soon after in something resembling syphilis. Tordenskiold in a duel in Germany. He was to be only 29 years old. So, Nyhavn in Copenhagen isn't so 'new' after all.
Attachments
Last edited:
Ben Z
Veteran
Joe Mondello said:
The high-ISO performance of the D3 is a separate issue from it being FF. I'm a Canon DSLR guy and while the high-ISO performance of the 5D is, by my own experience, marginally better than the 20/30D it wasn't justification for buying up and in fact I haven't. Even when I can get a 5D for $1200 (which will be when its replaced) I would probably still buy a 40D instead (or most likely stick with the 20D because the IQ improvements are small).
So if a FF Leica has vastly improved high-ISO over the M8, and/or no longer needs IR filters on the lenses, and/or has significantly more resolution without some heinous side-effect, then yes I agree I'll be excited. But if those same improvements came without changing the 1.33x crop I'd be equally excited. The part about it being FF isn't on my radar.
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Ben Z said:
Actually they are very related. The similar CMOS sensor in the D300 is a good 1.5+ stops poorer in high ISO performance due to the smaller photosites of the DX sensor.
I'm just saying "never say never" when it comes to whatever is next in photographic technology.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
I wouldn't mind a WATE.
And Olsen, I have deliberatly left wireless flashes in the picture, albeit not that obvious, to get certain effects with triggers.
I just got a chuckle because usually I try to figure out the lighting situations in pictures I see without reading captions and the flashes sitting there made that easier.
Don't mind me
And Olsen, I have deliberatly left wireless flashes in the picture, albeit not that obvious, to get certain effects with triggers.
I just got a chuckle because usually I try to figure out the lighting situations in pictures I see without reading captions and the flashes sitting there made that easier.
Don't mind me
Olsen
Well-known
cmogi10 said:I wouldn't mind a WATE.
I just got a chuckle because usually I try to figure out the lighting situations in pictures I see without reading captions and the flashes sitting there made that easier.
Don't mind me
Me too.
I spend a lot of time trying to figure out the light settings of particularly portraits and interiors done by pro's. Whenever I get into a pro's studio I am appalled all the light equipment. Flashes, lamps, reflectors and shades. - You hardly see the camera.
I learned this trick with having flashes facing the camera with light coming in from behind and facing the motive and camera, and using several flashes, from a pro. That's the whole trick having your flash pictures looking more 'pro'. Using extreme wide angle lenses you have to use several flashes. At the same tiime it is difficult to keep them out of the picture. You can just as well crop them away afterwards.
Full Frame, fair enough. Could Leica come up with a multi flash system like the Canon E-TTL, that would be just as nice.
Yet another WATE picture. From Wärmland, Sweden.
Attachments
Olsen
Well-known
jackal2513
richbroadbent
just sold my WATE
basically crud
i can have 38 different lenses for the same money
it doesnt even glow like a true leica lens should
basically crud
i can have 38 different lenses for the same money
it doesnt even glow like a true leica lens should
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, that's certainly WATE bashing, but I'm afraid you have lost me when it comes to the technical explanation of its shortcomings.jackal2513 said:
'basically crud' does not say a great deal about why you don't like it, and as for being able to buy 38 lenses for the same money, well, yes, you could probably buy several thousand hamburgers for the same money too.
Having had the WATE for a few months, I'd certainly prefer it to 38 lenses at 1/38 the price or to 3000 hamburgers; but I suppose my priorities must differ from yours. All I want is a compact, sharp, convenient lens that gives me a decent wide-angle on the M8 and a really good wide-angle on the MP. What do YOU want?
Cheers,
R.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Olsen said:
Guess where I put my flashes here
jackal2513
richbroadbent
Roger Hicks said:
1. it has more of a brittle look than the real pretty leica lenses
2. its prohibitively expensive
3. the focal lenths are not different enough
4. one single zeiss 18 is a bona fide replacement for the whole lens
5. the finder is like mounting Darth Vader's battle fleet star destroyer onto your camera
6. who needs 18 when you have 16 ?
7. who needs 16 when you have 18 ?
8. Mounting filters requires even MORE money to be spent
9. By the time you adjust finder, select WATE menu etc... I could have performed about six different lens changes
10. its big
11. its F4, fine if you are shooting solar winds up on the surface of the sun
in summary: zeiss 18 + 24 elmarit + 28 cron instead
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Hmmm....jackal2513 said:
I have the 18 and don't see it as a replacement at all. For finders, I just used a 15 on the MP and 21 on the M8, and did the rest by guesswork. The Zeiss 18 is an f/4, too, by the way. And it's pretty big, too. Have you actually used one?
Perhaps the difference in our perception is that I used it one way; you used it another; and it didn't suit the way you used it, so you don't think anyone should use one.
This is akin to those who say "Noboby needs ultra-fast lenses" or "No-one needs long teles" or "No-one needs ultra-wides" when what they mean is "I don't like/use..."
Personally, I can't see owning both a 24 and a 28, unless you use both film and M8, but I wouldn't fly into a tizzy about it.
Cheers,
R.
georgef
Well-known
"...The first to see the sheep head blink with it's eyes has had too much to drink..."
and I thought it was just me!!!!!! he he
and I thought it was just me!!!!!! he he
Olsen
Well-known
I tried to answer all this bashing, but the text turned into this 'solid unreadable block'. Which could be just as well. Bash away, folks! georgef, I have eaten these sheep heads ('smalahove') only once. I was 'very' drunk at the occation. Otherwise I would not have managed to get it down. Worst wasn't the eyes. It was the teeth. Still green after grassing...