The Mountain Genes

[uhoh7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I came across this today, about a fellow I knew of for other reasons, but whom Puts mentions when talking about the 135s.

 

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Pierpaolo_Ghisetti/14/00_pag.htm

 

I just wish Barnack would come back and haunt the current body designers, because my M9 is far more a pain to drag around in the backcountry, let alone the 240.

 

Please a small M field camera!

[Guest]

I came across this today, about a fellow I knew of for other reasons, but whom Puts mentions when talking about the 135s.

 

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Pierpaolo_Ghisetti/14/00_pag.htm

 

I just wish Barnack would come back and haunt the current body designers, because my M9 is far more a pain to drag around in the backcountry, let alone the 240.

 

Please a small M field camera!

 

Stay fair, please!

For wearers of eyeglasses the old Screwmount-Leicas with its peepholes are a real imposistion.

And sunglasses are duty for all high mountain regions both in summer and winter.

 

Only with a lot of luck I can take sharp photos with slight telephoto lenses and my longest focal lengths at the Barnack Leica are only 90 and 105 mm.

 

If you then consider that one has additionally to take for the mountains alongside films some filters, a light meter, different viewfinders and for self-shots at the summit also a separate self-timer, the advantage of the Barnack Leica is significantly reduced in weight and volume.

Edited August 19, 2015 by Guest

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[uhoh7]

Excellent post and fair points, Sir

 

But 80 years is about enough time to improve, no?

[luigi bertolotti]

Well... in terms of pure imaging, I say that the superb skiing pictures in the above link TODAY could be taken with any compact zoomed digicamera, of course IN THE RIGHT HANDS and with THE RIGHT PROCESSING... anyway, with a camera much lighter, portable and quick to use than a Barnack (in Leica  line, some Dlux... or a T with std. zoom)

Edited August 21, 2015 by luigi bertolotti

[Guest]

I came across this today, about a fellow I knew of for other reasons, but whom Puts mentions when talking about the 135s.

 

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Pierpaolo_Ghisetti/14/00_pag.htm

 

I just wish Barnack would come back and haunt the current body designers, because my M9 is far more a pain to drag around in the backcountry, let alone the 240.

 

Please a small M field camera!

The last edition of the VIDOM contains a very interesting article about Stefan Kruckenhauser.

[lleo]

Those are books I have to get. Fantastic pictures. And yes, today one can take them with a point and shoot, but the magic to take those pictures with a Barnack is not even comparable. And the film over the sensor...