Paulus Posted July 20, 2016 Share #1 Posted July 20, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Last week I was talking to a photographer who has seen war and worked in combat zones. It was an interesting afternoon. He said, that he would not take the digital Leica M 240. Rather took the Canon. We were musing about this. Such a great brand-in his film times he used the M6-but some some flaws in the "professional " eye. He missed the step to the M8 and never recovered to Leica for his professional tool, although he never would part of his M6. Not the camera as such, but the things around it. " Why can't I get a replacement in times of repair " To expensive to wait." " To expensive as an investment , due to this problems. " Things like that. What would it need, to revive the Robbert Capa early times again, now in the digital era. Is it possible and how? or is it still happening? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 20, 2016 Posted July 20, 2016 Hi Paulus, Take a look here Leica M 240. Might be the camera for ( war-) photographers if.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ECohen Posted July 20, 2016 Share #2 Posted July 20, 2016 I'm not sure if this is what you mean but...If I were being shot at... I would want auto focus and zoom lenses."What would it need, to revive the Robbert Capa early times again, now in the digital era"How about a step back in technology?....The right tool for the right job The M240 is a great camera but its no longer an everything camera.....In the 1940's it was an everything camera. 8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted July 20, 2016 Share #3 Posted July 20, 2016 I'm not sure if this is what you mean but...If I were being shot at... I would want auto focus and zoom lenses. "What would it need, to revive the Robbert Capa early times again, now in the digital era" How about a step back in technology?....The right tool for the right job The M240 is a great camera but its no longer an everything camera.....In the 1940's it was an everything camera. Fortunately I've never been trying to take photos when bullets have being flying around me or bombs about to fall. But on a much lower level of risk, I find that the more stressful and unpredictable the situation the more desirable manual focus is, because it allows me to feel in complete control, (even though i'm certainly not infallible, but I know my limits) which isn't always the case with AF. But that may be my lack of skill with AF of course. Zoom lenses are fine but I would be wary of overestimating their importance compared with the very small size and large apertures of M lenses which give a different kind of versatility. I agree a DSLR is closer to being an everything camera than an M, but as I think you suggest, there are some things an M can do better than a DSLR. Even in a war zone, I can but imagine.. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted July 20, 2016 There are still war photografers using an M 240 or M9. The autofocus and zoomlenses doesn't seem to bother them: https://www.pf.nl/verschrikkelijk-of-bloedmooi-de-wispelturigheid-van-oorlogsgebied/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 20, 2016 Share #5 Posted July 20, 2016 There are still war photografers using an M 240 or M9. The autofocus and zoomlenses doesn't seem to bother them: https://www.pf.nl/verschrikkelijk-of-bloedmooi-de-wispelturigheid-van-oorlogsgebied/ A moment of clarification. Those aren't war photographers. They are just plain old photographers taking pictures in a war zone. War photographers, the military kind, whose photos, you never see are supplied Nikon equipment. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted July 20, 2016 Share #6 Posted July 20, 2016 A moment of clarification. Those aren't war photographers. They are just plain old photographers taking pictures in a war zone. War photographers, the military kind, whose photos, you never see are supplied Nikon equipment. Anyone taking photos in the midst of a war can be called a war photographer even if they are other thingss as well. They don't have to be attached to the military, surely. I don't think that's what most people mean when they talk about war photographers is it? 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted July 20, 2016 Share #7 Posted July 20, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Peter, I think the traditionally accepted definition of a War Photographer is: A photographer who is photographing ongoing belligerent activity. Other people photographing something else are photographers taking pictures in a War Zone. If the photographer photographing the War Zone after the belligerent activity has subsided is shot at while they are photographing the War Zone then they have been transformed into War Photographers. By the way: During the War in Vietnam, along with the KE7A/M4 variants with 50mm Elcan lenses: There was no shortage of bright chrome M4's with bright chrome 50mm Summicron rigids. Best Regards, Michael 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted July 20, 2016 Share #8 Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) Many years ago I did a couple of workshops with the VII in Cambodia (with James Natchwey) and in Kashmir. They all shoot Canon and they stick to their M6s for more leisure shooting. As much as I love my 246s, nowadays they are tools for wealthy amateurs or artists, definitively not realiable and up to speed for war zones. I remember Gary Knight making fun of a guy that showed up at the workshop with two M8s and five lenses and that was shooting everything wide opened vs f11 and being there. At the time of Magnum they were the best tools that technology could offer. I am working for an international organization and I am living in post-war zones for twenty years. When I was shooting the M6 it was just about having enough Trix in the fridge for six months. I bought one of the 246 in November last year and it started to have various problems. I had to wait to get back to Europe to ship it to Leica and two months past already without having any news. By time it gets back and by the time I get back to Europe to collect it, good six months will have past.... Edited July 20, 2016 by giulioz 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 20, 2016 Share #9 Posted July 20, 2016 Anyone taking photos in the midst of a war can be called a war photographer even if they are other thingss as well. They don't have to be attached to the military, surely. I don't think that's what most people mean when they talk about war photographers is it? I think those days are pretty much over. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted July 20, 2016 Share #10 Posted July 20, 2016 I think those days are pretty much over. Not really if you look at how many war photographers still die every year. Andrea Rocchelli was recently killed in Ukraine..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted July 21, 2016 Share #11 Posted July 21, 2016 I've met many war photographers during the years having lived in conflict areas too often. Many had no photography skills or knowledge. Most used battered Canon 5D and 16-35 or 24-70 zooms. Most didn't make enough money to afford themselves a decent meal every day. All were very opinionated individuals with way too much bias on the situation they're photographing to be able to show the truth rather than their version of it. I doubt using a Leica M would be within the skill range of most. 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted July 21, 2016 Author Share #12 Posted July 21, 2016 I am not talking about these men. I mean photographers working for a newspaper who at one moment, started with an M6, but nowaday see no profit in using a digital M. One of the reasons mentioned is that they cannot afford to miss their camera for months, when it has to be shipped to Leica. They don't get a spare /loan camera when they have shipped it. The camera is to expensive to have one ( or more ) extra cameras in case one of them died. I remember the saying about the Nikonos V underwater camera: You have to have three: One to shoot, one on his way to the repairman, one on its way back. It would not be hard for Leica, to give them a spare camera, would it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted July 21, 2016 Share #13 Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) I've met many war photographers during the years having lived in conflict areas too often. Many had no photography skills or knowledge. Most used battered Canon 5D and 16-35 or 24-70 zooms. Most didn't make enough money to afford themselves a decent meal every day. All were very opinionated individuals with way too much bias on the situation they're photographing to be able to show the truth rather than their version of it. I doubt using a Leica M would be within the skill range of most. Like for other things, there are bad, average and very good war photographers. The bunch from VII are from another world (Alexandra Boulat (RIP), Ron Haviv, Gary Knight, James Natchwey, Christopher Morris, Antoni Kratochvil, John Stanmeyer just to name few). When I look at the images of James Natchwey I feel embarrassed as he has the capacity to make atrocity "beautiful". However I agree that those on the low side of the rank have a miserable life. I also agree about many of them beign biased. Both Canon and Nikon have professional services like CPS and NPS and their professional cameras (1DX and D5) are built with the action working pro in mind (PJs, wildlife and sport). Nowadays Leica has a different target audience, too much nostalgia and limited editions. Also the PJ does not need optical excellence and a lot of mpx, they need speed, ruggedness and reliability. The rangefinder would probably go out of alignment at the first bump. Here is a link to a very interesting documentary about James Natchwey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4tJLTOXBSc Edited July 21, 2016 by giulioz 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2016 Share #14 Posted July 21, 2016 I am not talking about these men. I mean photographers working for a newspaper who at one moment, started with an M6, but nowaday see no profit in using a digital M. One of the reasons mentioned is that they cannot afford to miss their camera for months, when it has to be shipped to Leica. They don't get a spare /loan camera when they have shipped it. The camera is to expensive to have one ( or more ) extra cameras in case one of them died. I remember the saying about the Nikonos V underwater camera: You have to have three: One to shoot, one on his way to the repairman, one on its way back. It would not be hard for Leica, to give them a spare camera, would it? That is a strange reason, as Leica does offer a professional, express (two days) and fast (one week) services, and will even provide loaners in case they cannot meet these targets to amateurs who have a legitimate urgent need, let alone professionals. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted July 21, 2016 Share #15 Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) I certainly didn't include all photographers in my description, but I would think it does apply to most rather than a few. Last time I saw James Nachtwey in Bangkok covering the violence against demonstrators, he got shot though superficially, and it was funny to see most photographers taking photos of him in action rather than covering the actual events. He was shooting with a 5D and 16-35 by the way, no hood and UV filter on I also agree that the M is certainly not suitable for war and conflict, due to the fragility of the rangefinder mechanism. DSLR are much better suited. Edited July 21, 2016 by edwardkaraa Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2016 Share #16 Posted July 21, 2016 I would think that a compelling reason would be to be able to throw a few reasonably priced backup cameras into your suitcase. Also I can imagine that long lenses are a reasonable safety precaution for war photographers (as they are needed for wildlife, sports and journalism), and much as I like using a telezoom on the M it I would hardly consider it suitable for professional use. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted July 21, 2016 Share #17 Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) I would think that a compelling reason would be to be able to throw a few reasonably priced backup cameras into your suitcase. Also I can imagine that long lenses are a reasonable safety precaution for war photographers (as they are needed for wildlife, sports and journalism), and much as I like using a telezoom on the M it I would hardly consider it suitable for professional use. Good PJ work is done with wide angles. Natchwey never used anything above 35mmm. Edited July 21, 2016 by giulioz 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted July 21, 2016 Share #18 Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) I didn't realise until a few years ago that the Army employs their own photographers, which must be one of the few regularly/decently paid jobs in photography these days! If only I'd known about that when I was a lot younger it may have appealed! https://www.facebook.com/BritishArmyPhotographers I see one guy there is using a Holga! Another link about 'war' photography http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/b45dbf2a#/b45dbf2a/1 I've also seen some superb war photography taken with an iphone - https://www.flickr.com/photos/basetrack/ Leica, Nikon, Holga or iphone. The equipment is irrelevant if it gets the results you want. Edited July 21, 2016 by earleygallery 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted July 21, 2016 Author Share #19 Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) Good PJ work is done with wide angles. Natchwey never used anything above 35mmm. Nachtwey ... Edited July 21, 2016 by Paulus Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colint544 Posted July 21, 2016 Share #20 Posted July 21, 2016 I'm an avid Leica user - started out with an M6 nearly 20 years ago, but I also work for the Scottish national newspapers, so I'm compelled to use DSLRs on a daily basis. I don't connect with modern DSLR cameras in the same way I do with a Leica M. The M is my favourite camera for shooting the streets of my hometown of Glasgow. I've never covered a war, but in 2011 I was dispatched to Nairobi to photograph the plight of the people who have to live in the slums of Mathare and Korogocho. The Korogocho slum is considered so dangerous that even the police rarely ever set foot in it. The reporter and I were warned that we should not stay in any one place for long, to keep moving at all times, and to leave the slum after no more than a couple of hours. Word gets around the slum fast. I met some of the nicest, most charming people I've ever met in those slums. People with no stake in anything, who have to live daily amidst rape, violence, death, disease and mayhem, people who had no reason to be nice to me. All in, it was an extremely humbling experience. Into the slums I took my own personal camera, a Leica M9-P, and a Canon 5dMk2 which belonged to the office. The Leica was fitted with a 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE, and for the Canon, I had the 16-35mm, and a 50mm f1.4. I'm pretty good at focussing quickly with an M, and I took a good number of shots with the M9-P. But pretty soon, I gave up with it, and just used the Canon. I think it was a combination of worrying about definitely getting the shots, the speed and accuracy of the Canon's autofocus, plus the flexibility of those two lenses. Shooting a modern DSLR is child's play - you almost can't fail to get the picture. You can get a person's eyes pin sharp every single time, even on a fast lens at full aperture. My hit rate on the Leica is not quite as high as with a DSLR. It's just that the Leica is a joy to use, and infinitely rewarding when a shot comes together. And I would never be parted from my Leica gear. Anyway, for what it's worth - here is one of the images from the slums from my Leica M9-P: http://colintempleton.tumblr.com/image/141662687856 And here is a selection of images from both of the slums, mostly on the Canon 5Dmk2 - http://colintempleton.com/essay/ Best wishes all, Colin 19 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.