Jump to content

lburn

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lburn

  1. I have an M10. I bought it because of its simplicity. But I want to get the best possible images out of it. There is surely no doubt that a good IBS system reduces camera shake and provides better images. Have Leica not installed this in their SL2 with its 40+MP? If in that, then why not in the M10R with its 41MP? I know the purist argument and its easy to say, if you want it then buy another sort of camera. But I don’t want another camera. I want the simplicity of Leica. IBS does not attract from that simplicity in any way. It just produces a sharper more detailed (less micro blurred) image.
  2. Thank you. Thats good to hear and is probably due mainly to the build and balance of the camera. I would be very interested though to hear in the future what experiences people shooting E.G. the summicron 90mm APO have with this.
  3. What about camera shake at this resolution? Presumably it was impossible to fit stabilisation into the camera body or it would have been too expensive?
  4. Thank you very much for those replies. That thread is very helpful and I should of course have checked the manual before doing my post. Sorry. What puzzles me is that Leica obviously know of the overexposure tendency on the M10 and would realise this is not a good thing. Why don't they correct it in a firmware update? Surely it is just a case of tweaking the relevant algorithm or is it much more complex than that? Manual metering negates the simplicity of use that aperture priority provides and if I was going to do that I think I might invest in a decent hand held light meter to get a really
  5. I believe that on the M10, of the three metering modes, spot metering mode is only available whilst using live view because the camera needs to read directly off the sensor. But what happens when you switch out of live view and carry on taking photos straight away using the range finder? What metering mode has the camera now defaulted to? Centre weighted or average? It would be very useful to know and I wondered if anyone had the answer. Lburn
  6. Does anyone know why it is not possible to spot meter on the Leica M10 unless you are using live view? I believe it is well known that the M10 tends to clip highlights (it certainly does in my experience) and accurate metering using the "expose to the right" technique is the best way, in my opinion, to control this. I have my exposure compensation routinely set to minus 1/3rd but this is nowhere near enough to deal with high contract situations. I realise that I could dial in much more underexposure in those situations but it would be much more convenient and quicker just to be able to take a
  7. Thank you for those thoughts. I certainly can't pretend to be able to take a completely shake free image handheld at a slow shutter speed (15th and below) and really admire those who can. I can sometimes get close but some degree of shake is there. I don't think I am alone in this. As I want to get the best out of Leica equipment, in body stabilisation would seem a logical way to go. But the key part of my thread is whether Leica have concluded that lack of stabilisation is now a limiting factor on the megapixel size they can go to -hence 24MP and not 36MP. If so, I think that would be a pity
  8. Would the Leica M type 240 be a better photographic tool if Leica had developed it to include sensor stabilisation? Is that not one of the main reasons Leica did not increase the megapixels in the M10 to, for example, 36MP (to the disappointment I suspect of many would be upgraders). I wonder this because it is hard to think of a mainstream serious amateur or professional camera on the market today which does NOT have good image stabilisation built in. It is regarded as an essential component presumably because, for many people, it is extremely difficult to take a genuinely pin sharp image on
  9. I am puzzled by the M10. Leica market it as getting closer to the analogue M's in terms of size and handling. "Simplicity" is the key. Hence the slimmer body and "better" viewfinder, and of course the added "simplicity" of no video capability. But I wonder how many photographers who love to use a rangefinder camera actually want to be able to shoot at 5 frames per second and found 2 frames per second far too slow? Was it actually unpleasant to hold an M type 240? How many really found the ability to shoot reasonable quality video if you wanted to, a nuisance or a distraction? I use it infreque
  10. If you are familiar with Thorsten Overgaard's web site, he rates the Sandisk Extreme pro 95mb/s 64MB as the fastest he has tried in the type 240. He gives his reasons in his very extensive and (I think) informative article on the M Type 240. It is speed rather than capacity that concerns him, like you, so maybe those conclusions are of interest to you. I use the Sandisk 16GB 95mb/s in my type 240 and find it fast enough for my needs and it has never let me down but may not be as fast as the 64MB version it seems. However my feeling is that once you have a card that you are happy with and find
  11. I'm not sure it can be dismissed as easily as "finger in front of...." I have had the same happen to me on my M240 when shooting a Tri Elmar 28,35,50 in good daylight. I thought the problem was that I must be blocking the window in some way so I made sure I was not. The problem persisted. I took out the battery to reset the camera and tried again. The same problem was still there. In the end I changed the lenses to a recent 35 Summicron and it worked OK. I thought therefore that the problem lay with the TriElmar but the thing is that has worked perfectly with that same camera both before and s
  12. As you know, using a third party tele on the M240 means using live view and is therefore a much slower process than using the viewfinder and rangefinder. But you say you don't want it for wild life so that shouldn't be a problem. I use Nikon lenses from the late 1990's with a Novoflex adaptor. There are huge numbers of such lenses out there at all focal lengths so the choice is yours. There are also of course masses of lenses from other top line manufacturers such as Cannon and Pentax etc. I also use a Sigma 150mm macro in Nikon mount. All these work well and the results are very usable, in m
  13. Thank you so much for that information. It works perfectly. I have set playback review to show the histogram and now it shows it in automatic review as well, just like you said. So simple! This is a huge benefit to me and I am sure to most photographers.
  14. Is it possible to display a histogram when the image taken is automatically on screen having just taken the shot? I am using an M type 240 (not the "P") with the latest firmware update. Thanks for any tips on this and apologies if the answer is already out there.
  15. The diaphragm leaves on my 35mm Summicron ASPH (latest version) open wider than they are at the marked f2 aperture. At f2 a "fringe" is visible when you look directly down on the front lens element and this disappears completely when the aperture ring is moved slightly beyond f2. The movement is only very slight before the lens comes to a stop. At which setting is the true f2 aperture? I expect this is quite a common occurrence for those with more equipment and experience than me and apologies if this topic has been covered elsewhere . lburn
  16. On my Summicron 35mm the lens aperture ring moves past the marked F2 stop position by a very small amount. Looking at the front optic I can see the aperture widen so that the lens is now wide open whereas at the F2 stop setting a fringe of the aperture leaves is visible. What is the practical effect of this? Is the lens at F2 at the marked setting and slightly wider when I go past it? Is this quite common (the lens is a new copy of the current version). lburn
  17. Thank you both for that advice, its very helpful lburn
  18. I want to use a polarisor filter on the Tri Elmar and have the 67mm filter adapter. I have just bought a Kenko 67mm polarisor circular filter which is sold as designed for rangefinder cameras because it has a rotating calibrated rim which can be matched to a hot shoe (or hand held) polariser with a matching rotating rim. That allows you to see the polarising effect you are getting and then match it on the camera. The problem is that, because of the thin rim, the filter will not fit far enough back into the filter holder to engage with the 67mm threads. I wondered if anyone has had this problem
  19. I used my M9 today for the first time in a couple of weeks. I have had it since just after launch in the UK and have taken a few thousand exposures with no problem. However, I have just uploaded and viewed 60 or so I took today and there is a crescent shaped double line running vertically from top to bottom of every picture in exactly the same place in the frame. I have inspected the sensor and it looks like a large crack. Its definitely not a hair because it doesn't look like one and does not dislodge with a blower sensor cleaner. Obviously I am taking the camera straight in to my Leica deale
  20. I have a 90mm tele elmarit which I like. It is not coded and has just lost its hood because the rubber has perished. Apart from flare when the sun is near the frame (specially at this time of year) it seems to me to be an impressive lens. However I love low light photography and natural light portraits. For those I would welcome the extra speed and possibly the advanced characteristics of the f2 APO e.g. the shallow depth and focus effects . I would welcome the views of those who actually use it on the M9. Is it the superb super sharp lens some reviews say (eg Ken Rockall)? Is its weight a rea
  21. Thank you. that is extremely helpful and very well explained! lburn
  22. Leica states on the leaflet that comes with its UV/IR filters that they can only be used with coded lenses and the menu has to be set to "On with UV/IR". Does anyone have practical experience of using such a filter on an uncoded lens? And also without setting the menu as instructed? If the filter is required to filter out the infra red that the sensor filter lets through, I do not see why the filter won't work straight on the lens. Most of my lenses are not coded including the superb 135 f3.4 which, as repeatedly stated in other threads, works extremely well on the M8. Apologies if this topic
  23. I have lust updated to the latest firmware version and it appears to have changed the RAW format from DNG to RWL which appears to be some sort of UNIX format and is unreadable on my Macbook and in photoshop. The camera was working fine in RAW before. Has anyone else had this weird and unwelcome experience? Is there a solution, I don't suppose the upgrade is reversible? Lburn.
×
×
  • Create New...