Jump to content

pgk

Members
  • Posts

    12,036
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pgk

  1. Versus the dSLR. The Rangefinder allows focus which is independent of focal length. Where this is most useful is with wide-angle lenses which can be difficult to focus manually and can even be awkward on dSLRs/EVFs. Its one of the things I like about RF cameras. However, working aginst this is the ability to see beyond the frame for the focal length being used. The wider the lens, the less of the surroundings which can be seen. So moving towards using an external viewfinder starts to make this irrelevant to a degree. IMO the 'sweet spot' is ~35mm which is why it is the lens I use most of the time. The 50 is also well catered for but focus is not quite so fast with precision. Regarding the 50mm Summilux, which I do have and which is my least used Leica M lens, its a fabulous lens but it has no magic about it other than being a highly competent performer with excellent characteristics all round. It is also relatively small and very well made. I never understand why people don't see the Leica M as a 'landscape' camera because it is very capable as such and has certainly been used by famous photographers as a landscape and travel camera. It really is a matter of perception and comfortableness with a camera type. As for 'better' well forget it. Most decent cameras and lenses today are VERY good and will deliver excellent images seperated by mere nuances visible to the cogniscenti only.
  2. I'll just say that there has been a tendency by many camera manufacturers recenty to 'hype up' the launch of new products. Unfortunately, in the case of the M11 there was an anticipation which bordered on hysteria at times IMO. Enthusiasm is one thing but I found much of the threads on the forthcoming M11 to be overexcited and as a result events have taken unfortunate turns (I am sad to lose these members). That said, Andreas and the mods have done a great job in the years I have been a member and have never been anything other than open about affiliations and why decisions have been made, whilst still respecting privacy. Keep it up.
  3. I haven't tried it but it is extremely unlikely. If it did I am sure that someone would have already made a wide-angle medium format camera using this lens. The physical design suggests not. The actual design was for an intendeduse on 35mm film so, no it almost certainly (99.9999%) won't cover 6x6, and if by some extraordinary chance it did, it certainly wouldn't give good results. I suspect that the image circle is just marginally larger than the diagonal of 35mm format (24x36mm).
  4. Ignorance can be bliss. If you don't know that you are shooting garbage you may still be happy shooting it. Personally I enjoy learning more about photography and after 40+ years I'm delighted to know that there is an awful lot more to learn - it will see me out for sure.
  5. Quite simply, the problem is that it isn't that simple. The overall 'system' performance is the sum of its parts, so even a 'lesser' lens will be improved by a 'better' sensor. The concept of 'ultimate' quality is equally flawed because very importantly it depends on subject and lighting too. So to answer your question; it depends. If you are shooting under precisely controlled conditions and printing very large then an M11/APO lens will probably give results which are 'best' for doing so. If you are not then the difference between this combination and an earlier system is potentially far less noticeable even by the cognoscenti. Once we got to 20~30MPixels small apertures (f/11-16 and smaller) diffraction limits the resolution so increasing MPixels is not always a valid solution if you intend to shoot at small apertures. So it all depends and only you can determine the parameters which will affect your images and hence the viability of specific combinations of lens/camera.
  6. If you don't know what you are doing you are at the mercy of automation and given the same situation you will get the same result. Which is why there seems to be a lot of similar material around. If you are happy for everything to go this way then fine, but if you genuinely want to expore how to be creative without being bound by technology then some grasp of technicalitis is essential. Thos who believe otherwise are limiting their vision.
  7. I'm NOT an APO user. My 35mm pre-FLE Summilux is very, very good and I see no reason to chenge it for another 35mm M lens. This won't answer your question though.
  8. No. Neither really enthuse me at all. I want a 'back to basics' camera, no frills whatsoever. Basically as per the original concept of the M.
  9. M4-2, M4-P - cheaper constructon than the M4 I believe, without compromising the fundamentals. M6 then built on this and added, then TTL. From my perspective the M11 still suffers from 'bloat' from what I have read. I still think that there is a significant market for a digital version of the M6. Manual exposure, centre-weighted meter, no frills whatsoever. That said I wonder if the current sensors are too sophisticated to make such modifications substantially cheaper and that another model would not be too much less to buy?
  10. Problem is that I also shoot underwater - Sony A7 system - also for macro, copying, old lenses, etc. I do have an Sl for some of this too, but adding an M11 isn't going to happen at the price.
  11. By offering a cheaper version - as all other makers do. Tried and tested. Cheaper body (with 'lower' specifications), same lenses and lots of upgrade potential.
  12. My problem is that I cannot shoot everything on Leica Ms so I have to have another system. This significantly increases my costs. Factor in a second body and the M11 is looking like too much of an expensive luxury to be a 'pro' camera unfortunately. My M9s are still going strong anyway, and as I'm a low ISO shooter most of the time, and as their files print well enough for 99.99% of my needs, I have been loath to upgrade them. I like the CCD characteristics too. If I do buy another M it will probably be to a lightly used M10 which makes a great deal more sense in business terms.
  13. For me the question is twofold (and coloured entirely by my status as a full-time frrelance phtographer). Firstly, do I really need any advantages that a new camera offers? Secondly, what is the cost of ownership over the predicted lifespan which I would anticipate the camera to have (for me)? Which ties in to the first in many ways. About the only real advantage the M11 genuinely offers me is the increased MPixels, but I already have a camera of 40+ MPixels and rarely need to take advantage of even these, so the second has to be sufficiently low to make the advantage reasonavly cost-effective. At the price I'm afraid that the M11 simply does not make enough sense to be viable. It would make much more sense for me to invest in a lightly used M10 model.
  14. The best thing about the M12 will be that it will reduce the prices of the M10 and M11 ...... I was a little disappointed that the predecessor thread to this didn't get 11k posts. Starting this one early means that there is a lot of time to build up the hysteria to potentailly achieve a fitting 12k posts .....
  15. My view on KR remains the same as it always was.
  16. Whilst a few people really like the M5 it was a commercial failure. Leica (hopefully) learned that changing the form factor of the M camera is a bad idea (commercially at least). FWIW when I was a student I worked in a camera shop in London (~1980) and we had a lovely chrome M5 in stock. It took a very long time to sell.
  17. The most important question is actually whether this thread will exceed 6k posts. It just might! 11k would have been prefereable of course😉.
  18. No. I'm still making money from M9s though😉. And I still sell images taken on 5D cameras, S2Pro cameras and even from transparencies. Making money from a camera has nothing to do with its technical capabilities and a lot to do with the image being viable for its required purpose. I've been freelance for over 30 years and have used numerous camera all of which have been used to make money.
  19. Stuart, enjoy! Having 'downsized ourselves, we have downsized internally as I insulate upstairs. Two ceilings down and one to go. Now for the tricky bit of fitting vents and insulation!
  20. I recently bought a lens. Trying to find a really objective review on the web prior to buying it proved to be difficult, if not nigh impossible. Most 'reviewers' never state exactly what credentials they have for producing a worthwhile review, most then use vague terminology and make sweeping statements and, worst of all, demonstrate their findings generally with web jpegs or if not, allow bland RAW files to be downloaded which rarely demonstrate 'stressed' photographic situations (where the equipment can be seen performing under a testing condition). So I gave up on reviews, bought the lens and tried it myself. It works fine, delivers well enough and I know that the person who tested it (me) knows exatly what he wants to use it for(😊). Problem solved.
  21. I should add that the waterhouse stop is made from a piece of plastic and hole punched, so less than perfect😉.
  22. The FT-3 arrived - a good, honest copy with some wear but not that much for a 45 year old camera. Here's a rough shot on a mid-1890's lens (hence the contrat issues) on the SL.
  23. And, as a Sony user, oddly enough I don't actually find that all this stuff always works as well as is often claimed.
  24. It is why there are lightly used secondhand cameras on the market at much reduced prices and should not be discouraged🙄.
×
×
  • Create New...