Erwin, part 6...

[carstenw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am not sure that your D60 strategy makes total sense. The Leica is really good at close range and has some fast lenses which are great wide open. An M9 with a 75 Lux or 90 Cron pre-Asph would be great for portrait duty, for example. It is not good for regular sports though, and the D60 doesn't have the high-ISO performance of the D700, and perhaps more seriously, it doesn't have the stronger AF system either.

 

I would rather say that you either keep the D700 system until the sports thing passes, and Leica releases the next firmware update, or you keep the D700 with 70-200, and use the M9 for portraits. There will be more noise in dark locations, yes, but as you say, the resulting "grain" isn't unpleasant, and the fast lenses make up for it in sharpness. If you go this route, a not too expensive but very nice option would be M9 + 90 Cron pre-Asph + 35 Cron IV. Each of these two lenses costs about €800-1000 or a little less if you have time to shop around and wait for a good deal. If you want to save even more money, you can go for two used Zeiss ZM lenses. Even cheaper would be two Voigtländer lenses, although they often aren't as fast. All are good.

 

I would also test the various noise reduction software solutions a bit before deciding. At the time that I tested, the NoiseWare package did better with my M8 than the others (earlier this year). Lightroom 3 is also on the way and apparently has improved noise reduction algorithms, so there might be some help there.

 

But! Trying to do too much with too little money is an endless source of frustration. Keep the D700 until you can find a solution without serious compromises. Don't get a D60 only to realize that it can't focus fast enough to keep up with sports, for example.

[ajtorres]

I do agree with the comment about "the current obsession for clean images....".

 

I recently had a weekend away - where I visited there were several photographic galleries, all with beautiful landscape prints, some framed some not. All were technically excellent, effectively composed and usually lit by evening or morning light (although not every image). BUT, and IMHO opinion its a big but, you could have shuffled the images around, mixed them up, swopped them from gallery to gallery as much as you wanted because they all were of very similar style - very competent, crisp, clean images. And after a time I felt tired of them (I would say bored but that would not be quite accurate) and none appealed enough for me to actually buy one.

 

I suppose my point is that technical perfection seems to some extent to be resulting in convergent 'creativity'. Actually, I suspect that I find idiosyncratic cameras more fun to use and an aid to more (?) creative thinking.

 

I can't agree more with your comment. Even if you look at pictures in most websites with pro or near pro photographers, they look all the same: They are perfect and beautiful (there is not a single pixel out of place), but boringly similar. You can mix them up and can't say who took them because everybody is trying to copy that "perfection" instead of developing their own style. This reminds me a quote of Elliot Erwitt:

 

"I don't mind progress. But digital photography has made every man, woman, child and chimpanzee a photographer of sorts and consequently has numbed down the general quality of photographs...."

 

Alejandro

[ulrikft]

I am not sure that your D60 strategy makes total sense. The Leica is really good at close range and has some fast lenses which are great wide open. An M9 with a 75 Lux or 90 Cron pre-Asph would be great for portrait duty, for example. It is not good for regular sports though, and the D60 doesn't have the high-ISO performance of the D700, and perhaps more seriously, it doesn't have the stronger AF system either.

 

I would rather say that you either keep the D700 system until the sports thing passes, and Leica releases the next firmware update, or you keep the D700 with 70-200, and use the M9 for portraits. There will be more noise in dark locations, yes, but as you say, the resulting "grain" isn't unpleasant, and the fast lenses make up for it in sharpness. If you go this route, a not too expensive but very nice option would be M9 + 90 Cron pre-Asph + 35 Cron IV. Each of these two lenses costs about €800-1000 or a little less if you have time to shop around and wait for a good deal. If you want to save even more money, you can go for two used Zeiss ZM lenses. Even cheaper would be two Voigtländer lenses, although they often aren't as fast. All are good.

 

I would also test the various noise reduction software solutions a bit before deciding. At the time that I tested, the NoiseWare package did better with my M8 than the others (earlier this year). Lightroom 3 is also on the way and apparently has improved noise reduction algorithms, so there might be some help there.

 

But! Trying to do too much with too little money is an endless source of frustration. Keep the D700 until you can find a solution without serious compromises. Don't get a D60 only to realize that it can't focus fast enough to keep up with sports, for example.

 

Thanks for the tip! Sounds like good and sound advice. I can sell off some of the nikon lenses I don't use, put the money into a leica-account, and use the earnings from the photo jobs from now until next spring towards a M9. The d700 is a real, real joy to use for sports, beacause it is so... responsive, fast an delicious, but when i do travel/repotage, carrying 3-4kgs of stuff (7-9 lbs), is a bit over the top on long days, and I would love a 25,50,90 package that weighs in at 1.5-2.5kgs instead.

 

Again, thanks for the input! Appreciate it!

[carstenw]

Are you also on FM? I have been admiring the Nikon shots of someone named Ulrik on the Alternative forum there.

 

Seriously, if you really like the D700, keep it forever. Life is too short to have these kinds of frustrations. Generally, only sell stuff you don't like. I have often regretted a sale made to enable another purchase. If it takes longer to get an M9, so be it, but at least you won't have regrets (other than financial ).

 

Oh, another option: have you thought about swapping for a D300? It would get you closer to the action, and the high ISO might also be good? I think also the AF system is good there, but check on a Nikon forum for more authoritative answers.

[ulrikft]

Are you also on FM? I have been admiring the Nikon shots of someone named Ulrik on the Alternative forum there.

 

Seriously, if you really like the D700, keep it forever. Life is too short to have these kinds of frustrations. Generally, only sell stuff you don't like. I have often regretted a sale made to enable another purchase. If it takes longer to get an M9, so be it, but at least you won't have regrets (other than financial ).

 

Oh, another option: have you thought about swapping for a D300? It would get you closer to the action, and the high ISO might also be good? I think also the AF system is good there, but check on a Nikon forum for more authoritative answers.

Hehe, that would be me yes! I post too many images on the alternative forum.. Thank you very much!

 

I have thought about getting a d300 and keeping my current 70-200 2.8. If I could get a nicely used d300, that would be a nice combo, I would lose about a stop of high iso capability, but I would get nice af and long reach.

 

But I think you guys have convinced me, I'll just save up for a few months longer, keep my d700, sell some glass I don't use, love my alternative MF glass on the d700 to death as I always have, and when the day comes, get a M9 and a small bunch of lenses and enjoy that too

[carstenw]

Ulrik, I have been thinking about this a lot, and looking at your shots on FM again.

 

Why exactly do you want an M9? You seem to really be a in good groove with the D700. Are you bored?

 

I would hate to see you pick one up, not get along with it, and start a pointless angry thread like ovredal did. I was incredibly frustrated reading that thread, but there was so much misinformation and vitriol in it that I didn't even know where to start, and so I didn't. I lost a lot of respect for several photographers whose photos I had really been enjoying up to that point, just from their ignorant comments in that thread. I think of all the people bashing the camera, only 2 had actually used one seriously, and ovredal only for 7 days. Brainiac, who I like and respect in general, has become some kind of "authority" on the M8 and its flaws, yet he has only tested it at his dealer, or at least that was the case when I more or less left FM, due to the hostile environment for M8 owners. In other words, he knows some numbers and pseudo-facts, but has no real clue about the camera itself. With these cameras, there is a long getting-to-know period needed, and during this period, you must systematically adapt to the camera's idiosyncracies, because it cannot adapt to yours, like a Canon or Nikon can. If you do this, and if you persevere, there is a decent risk that you will own a Leica M in some form for the rest of your life; they are really neat. I had never really heard of Leica before I started looking for better lenses for my 5D, yet in one year, I had become so enthralled with the company and their lenses and cameras that I had sold everything else and bought an M8 with the 50 Lux ASPH, perhaps the best lens I have ever used.

 

The point is: the M8/M9 is the same camera whether you buy it or not. It does not suddenly become a better or worse camera just because you (or ovredal) buys it. All the issues are known, at least with the M8, and it is clear that it is not for everyone. There should be no surprises when spending that much money. Be sure that this is really what you want, that you test it as much as possible, and that the D700 cannot do what you want to do with the M9. To keep perspective, for the same money, you could almost buy a used Nikkor-Noct and 200/2!

[ulrikft]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ulrik, I have been thinking about this a lot, and looking at your shots on FM again.

 

Why exactly do you want an M9? You seem to really be a in good groove with the D700. Are you bored?

 

I would hate to see you pick one up, not get along with it, and start a pointless angry thread like ovredal did. I was incredibly frustrated reading that thread, but there was so much misinformation and vitriol in it that I didn't even know where to start, and so I didn't. I lost a lot of respect for several photographers whose photos I had really been enjoying up to that point, just from their ignorant comments in that thread. I think of all the people bashing the camera, only 2 had actually used one seriously, and ovredal only for 7 days. Brainiac, who I like and respect in general, has become some kind of "authority" on the M8 and its flaws, yet he has only tested it at his dealer, or at least that was the case when I more or less left FM, due to the hostile environment for M8 owners. In other words, he knows some numbers and pseudo-facts, but has no real clue about the camera itself. With these cameras, there is a long getting-to-know period needed, and during this period, you must systematically adapt to the camera's idiosyncracies, because it cannot adapt to yours, like a Canon or Nikon can. If you do this, and if you persevere, there is a decent risk that you will own a Leica M in some form for the rest of your life; they are really neat. I had never really heard of Leica before I started looking for better lenses for my 5D, yet in one year, I had become so enthralled with the company and their lenses and cameras that I had sold everything else and bought an M8 with the 50 Lux ASPH, perhaps the best lens I have ever used.

 

The point is: the M8/M9 is the same camera whether you buy it or not. It does not suddenly become a better camera just because you (or ovredal) buys it. All the issues are known, at least with the M8, and it is clear that it is not for everyone. There should be no surprises when spending that much money. Be sure that this is really what you want, that you test it as much as possible, and that the D700 cannot do what you want to do with the M9. To keep perspective, for the same money, you could buy a Nikkor-Noct and a 200/2!

 

Hey!

 

Thanks for responding in such a way!

 

I do love my d700. I really do. I just dislike the size of a SLR-outfit. That is pretty much the only thing. That and my fascination for MF, and rangefinding-mf being my favourite. I think that is pretty much it. That and of course, I love fast, alternative glass. 50 1.1, 35 1.2 etc. I don't know though, maybe it is best to stick with the d700 and alternative glass? I do have the 58 1.2 (rokkor ) and yes, I could get a 58 1.2 noct nikkor, use that with my 24 2.0 and a mf 85 1.4, and have heaps of money left for travels, whiskey and other stuff..

 

thanks again!

[carstenw]

Well... maybe you are on the right track then.

 

One caution: Voigtländer makes some really good lenses, but they don't always satisfy the way the Leica or Zeiss lenses do. They are very competent, but boke is sometimes a little weird-alice and the drawing is not always as exciting. You need to do research for each and every lens, to make sure that it does what you hope. The 50/1.1 is one example. I have seen some really nice shots with it, but I haven't yet seen anything that would make me buy it instead of saving up for an older Leica Noctilux f/1, which I was fortunate enough to be able to borrow for a long time from a fellow forum member. Fantastic lens, and the drawing was very special in a way that I just don't see in the 50/1.1. Maybe I just don't know enough about the lens, but do research carefully.

[ulrikft]

Well... maybe you are on the right track then.

 

One caution: Voigtländer makes some really good lenses, but they don't always satisfy the way the Leica or Zeiss lenses do. They are very competent, but boke is sometimes a little weird-alice and the drawing is not always as exciting. You need to do research for each and every lens, to make sure that it does what you hope. The 50/1.1 is one example. I have seen some really nice shots with it, but I haven't yet seen anything that would make me buy it instead of saving up for an older Leica Noctilux f/1, which I was fortunate enough to be able to borrow for a long time from a fellow forum member. Fantastic lens, and the drawing was very special in a way that I just don't see in the 50/1.1. Maybe I just don't know enough about the lens, but do research carefully.

 

I actually am borrowing a M6 with the old 50/1.0 now! I guess I'll see what i feel about it when i develop a few films in a week or so! I love lenses with character, but I also like them to be sharp wide open... hard to find a perfect lens I guess!

[ulrikft]

Ouch, checked old noct prices now... I suspect I'll be getting a Konica Hexanon 50 1.2, canon 50 1.2 or a nokton 50 1.1..

[carstenw]

Well, the old Noct is pretty sharp stopped down a little, and by f/2.8 it is very sharp, so given that it starts so much wider open than most lenses, maybe it can be forgiven if it is a little soft at f/1 You should seriously consider the 50 Lux ASPH if you like sharp lenses with great boke. It is pricy, but IMO it is one of the very best lenses ever made, and I mean top-3 sort of thing. I had to send mine back a couple of times to get it right, but boy was it worth it.

 

Here is one of my favorite shots with the Noctilux:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Actually, maybe we should take this somewhere else. I just noticed that we are hopelessly off-topic...

[ulrikft]

Good point.. But still: thanks a whole lot for tips, input and general advice! I really, really appreciate it. a M9 cost 10.000 USD here in norway, so i need all the advice I can get before taking such a plunge.. I won't have saved up enough before sometime around june if I don't sell off d700, so I have no rush i guess

[ho_co]

... Actually, maybe we should take this somewhere else. I just noticed that we are hopelessly off-topic...

Intelligence and artistic appreciation are never off-topic.

 

Keep it up. I'm learning a lot!

[carstenw]

Good point.. But still: thanks a whole lot for tips, input and general advice! I really, really appreciate it. a M9 cost 10.000 USD here in norway, so i need all the advice I can get before taking such a plunge.. I won't have saved up enough before sometime around june if I don't sell off d700, so I have no rush i guess

 

If you want to play around a bit, and feel like shooting some film, you could buy a used M6 (the first compact M with a built-in light meter; fully manual though), and see how you like the experience over longer time. You should be able to resell it for more or less the same you bought it for. The M9 costs €5500 here, and an M6 can be had in great condition for around €1000, in okay condition for less, so it would be a (relatively) small investment to get to try out a FF M. I also own an M6, and it is a lovely camera, which the most satisfying little *snick* when you take a photo. It is not as silent as some would have you believe, but it is still quiet, and operating it is pure pleasure. Here is an example, from a great dealer here in Berlin:

 

http://tinyurl.com/yzwwppv

 

Do spend some time and effort trying to figure out if this is for you at all. You will lose a lot of money if you buy an M9 new and sell it used.

 

Edit: I should have re-read the previous posts again before posting this. I just noticed that you are borrowing an M6 and Noctilux. I guess you will answer a lot of your own questions with this setup. By the way, the M9 costs about $2000 less in Germany, more than enough difference to come here and pick one up, while saving a lot of money which could be put towards a second-hand lens, which you can also get cheaper here. Are you certain you want to buy in Norway? I come from Denmark, and know how unreasonable new-prices can be in those expensive countries.

[carstenw]

Intelligence and appreciation are never off-topic.

 

Keep it up. I'm learning a lot!

 

What are *you* learning from this? You probably have more experience than both of us combined and doubled

 

Oh, on the topic of whisky (whiskey is Irish), if you can find one, Ulrik, try the Glenfiddich 15 year Solera Reserva. Note that those last two words make the difference between a decent Scotch and a fantastic one. It is hard to find though. I am also very fond of various Bruichladdichs, as well as Highland Park 18. What do you prefer?

[ulrikft]

What are *you* learning from this? You probably have more experience than both of us combined and doubled

 

Oh, on the topic of whisky (whiskey is Irish), if you can find one, Ulrik, try the Glenfiddich 15 year Solera Reserva. Note that those last two words make the difference between a decent Scotch and a fantastic one. It is hard to find though. I am also very fond of various Bruichladdichs, as well as Highland Park 18. What do you prefer?

 

Right now, I have to admit that I'm working my way trough something as simple as Jameson triple distilled. But my all time favourite is the 27 year old Laphroaig! Not often I get to taste that though.. I have to try that Glenfiddich though, how would you describe the taste?

 

And on a more camera related note:

 

If I just want to shoot RF with a decent vf for some time, to get used to it. (I got a yashica gsn and a canonet ql19, but both those have very, very faint RF-patches), how would a Bessa 1.0 VF, or maybe a zeiss ikon compare to a M6? i guess the first is not nearly as well built, and the second is built ok, but not leica-good. I am thinking about your tip, and I guess a m6/zeiss ikon/bessa + a CV 50 1.5 is a nice way to really get into film rf-testing

[ulrikft]

Actually, found a Zeiss Ikon + 50 2.0 zeiss locally for about 599, loose focus ring, and rf-patch focusing past infinity.. Not sure if it is worth it, those errors might imply that it has been dropped, and repairs might be expensive.

[carstenw]

Right now, I have to admit that I'm working my way trough something as simple as Jameson triple distilled. But my all time favourite is the 27 year old Laphroaig! Not often I get to taste that though.. I have to try that Glenfiddich though, how would you describe the taste?

 

Ah, Jameson is Irish, so your spelling was right. That'll teach me.

 

I enjoy Scotch a lot and have tasted quite a few, but I don't know how to describe them Let me try: not peaty, very full flavoured, but complex. Not harsh, smooth. It has been a little while, so I would have to guess the notes, which I won't try. Maybe oak or red currants or something like that. My girlfriend gave me a Scotch-tasting course, and I'll be taking it sometime soon. Then I can sound more intelligent about things like this

 

If I just want to shoot RF with a decent vf for some time, to get used to it. (I got a yashica gsn and a canonet ql19, but both those have very, very faint RF-patches), how would a Bessa 1.0 VF, or maybe a zeiss ikon compare to a M6? i guess the first is not nearly as well built, and the second is built ok, but not leica-good. I am thinking about your tip, and I guess a m6/zeiss ikon/bessa + a CV 50 1.5 is a nice way to really get into film rf-testing

 

I haven't tried either a Bessa or a Zeiss Ikon, but as far as I understand, the Bessa is a nice camera, but not in the same league. It is not as well built, and the rangefinder is shorter, i.e. less accurate. It doesn't have as many framelines, and you change them manually, I think. Still a good camera though, but I don't think it will give you such a good idea about the M9.

 

The Zeiss Ikon is a step up. Solid construction, the viewfinder is supposed to be larger and brighter than the Leica by a small amount, a couple of other aspects are not quite as nice as the Leica, but I don't remember the details. Well built, but a lot lighter, so it might feel flimsy. It is not. It is in some ways more modern. It is a bit like a Lamborghini Gallardo compared to a Ferrari Maranello, angular and more modern compared to more curvaceous and sexy. I don't think it would disappoint, but since the purpose is to decide whether to spend a sh*tload of money on an M9, I would say go for the M6, it will give you a better idea. I think it might also be useful to try a tabbed lens, to see if that is for you or not, before buying an expensive lens.

 

You might consider a 1-year subscription to Sean Reid's site, http://www.reidreviews.com/. He answers a lot of these questions. He is wordy, but there is a lot of good information in them. I subscribed for two years, until my kit stopped changing so much.

 

Actually, found a Zeiss Ikon + 50 2.0 zeiss locally for about 599, loose focus ring, and rf-patch focusing past infinity.. Not sure if it is worth it, those errors might imply that it has been dropped, and repairs might be expensive.

 

I would be very cautious about that. It sounds like a good deal, but could easily cost you more than its value after repairs. I don't know the Zeiss rangefinder. The Leica rangefinder is easy to adjust, there is a little eccentric wheel just inside the mount which you can turn to adjust the distance at which it engages. If the Zeiss is the same, then it *might* just require a tweak with a hex key. Then again, it might not. If it has been dropped, you should see marks somewhere. If it has just been bumped, perhaps hard, there is likely no permanent damage, but it will require an adjustment. I don't know anything about loose focusing rings.

[ulrikft]

Been looking around on local forums now, actually a M7 for sale with a russian 50/2 for 1300 Euro.. not that bad.

 

I guess I'll just be on the lookout for a nice M6 locally, last month one went for 420 euro, and another for 500 eur, so there are nice copies around.

 

I also get a bit of an experience with the m6 and the 50/1.0 now, It is mostly "how accurate can i focus and recompose close in at f/1.0"-types of experiments I'm running now.. Trying to see how well i can use the RF for my kind of photography!

 

Edit:

 

whisky tasting course sounds like a dream! I was thinking about getting one of those "you own 1 square meter of our land"-kind of deals with laphroig, so i can go there once a year and check out my patch..

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[eronald]

Ulrik,

 

I find that my D3x is very compact with a 50/1.8 which is a seriously good lens, and I also have a tiny MF 20/2.8. The Leica is very nice, but it is a special purpose camera - I'd say the Nikon is a pickup truck, the Leica is a Porsche.

 

Edmund

 

 

Hey!

 

Thanks for responding in such a way!

 

I do love my d700. I really do. I just dislike the size of a SLR-outfit. That is pretty much the only thing. That and my fascination for MF, and rangefinding-mf being my favourite. I think that is pretty much it. That and of course, I love fast, alternative glass. 50 1.1, 35 1.2 etc. I don't know though, maybe it is best to stick with the d700 and alternative glass? I do have the 58 1.2 (rokkor ) and yes, I could get a 58 1.2 noct nikkor, use that with my 24 2.0 and a mf 85 1.4, and have heaps of money left for travels, whiskey and other stuff..

 

thanks again!