MikeMyers Posted November 24, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 24, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I was packing for a several-month trip to Asia, and after a lot of thinking about it, I figured I would leave my DSLR camera home and just take my M8.2 with several lenses. The advantages were obvious - less weight and bulk, and probably better image quality. Then I had second thoughts. So many of the things I do require knowing what the picture will be like before snapping the shutter, and a DSLR does this much better. Two examples - for a friend, I take photos of the hotel rooms where I stay (ultra-wide angle, usually 11mm) and often using HDR, and also the fancy meals at the restaurant, with everything set up before hand, moving things around until it looks perfect in the viewfinder. I've never tried, but to me, this just doesn't seem what the M8 is good at. There was a second consideration as well - should the unthinkable happen, and I lost the Leica somehow, it would be very difficult for me to replace it (and the lens...). On the other hand, the price on a Nikon D2x has dropped so much, it would be easy to replace for not all that much money. I talked myself out of the second issue, as I don't expect a problem like that, but the first issue seemed to require that I bring a DSLR along, even if I had to purchase an inexpensive used D40 for the purpose. That didn't happen, so here I am in Thailand right now shooting rooms for their website and fancy dinner meals as well, both the whole table, and then a close-up of the food. Maybe I'm missing something, but the M8 just didn't seem appropriate for all this. I'm sure the M8 would be better for my "travel photos", but even then, when I put on an ultra-wide angle lens, I don't really know what the final image will be until I see it on the rear screen. As has been pointed out numerous times, which is "better" (RF or DSLR) depends a lot on what you're planning on doing with the camera........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 24, 2009 Posted November 24, 2009 Hi MikeMyers, Take a look here RF vs. DSLR. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jsrockit Posted November 24, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 24, 2009 Maybe I'm missing something, but the M8 just didn't seem appropriate for all this. It could have worked, but you chose the tool you thought would do the job better. Nothing wrong with that. It sounds like it was a paid project, so it is better to be safe than sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 24, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 24, 2009 But you might slip an M8 with a 35 Summicron in your pocket Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted November 24, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 24, 2009 There's no "one size fits all" answer, it's down to individual preference and choice. Personally I'd be more than happy to travel the world with a 28mm and a 50mm lens. Something wider would be the choice for a 3rd lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerard Posted November 24, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 24, 2009 I take photos of the hotel rooms where I stay and often using HDR, and also the fancy meals at the restaurant.... Sounds like you have very specific needs for which some 'perfect' tools are available. But outside of satisfying these specific needs, those 'perfect' tools will be compromised. That's the way things go; there is always a compromise somewhere along the line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMyers Posted November 25, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted November 25, 2009 The first suggestion is what I wish I had done, as then I'd have both. When it comes to "precise" photography, where you know exactly what you want to achieve, the Nikon makes it easy. Put the camera on a tripod, take a few test photos, adjusting the position and lighting, and at some point you get exactly what you want. With the Leica, I don't even know where the frame lines really are... nor can I properly compensate for the difference in position between the viewfinder and the lens. I thought I could make the Leica work anyway... I could "fix" the wide-angle problem either by buying the 12mm from CameraQuest, or getting an adapter so my 11-18 Nikon-mount lens would fit. Problem solved. For HDR, forget it. The M9 might work for that, but not the M8. On the Nikon I just turn on bracketing, go to high-speed burst mode, take 5, 7, or 9 quick images, and combine them into the desired result. Grudgingly, I took the Nikon with me, as it does all the "technical" stuff so effortlessly, and the results are fabulous if I do my part right. The Leica was just not designed for that kind of photography. When I go walking around the street, shooting things I enjoy, the Leica makes this so easy. The Nikon at that point is over-kill as I see it. All things considered, I now wish I had brought along my M3, and gone back to film for my walk-around photos. I guess I'll have to break down and purchase a good negative scanner, one with high resolution and which holds the negative or slide perfectly flat. A side benefit is that my ultra-wide-angle Voigtlander lenses then have the full field of view they were designed to provide. I don't like taking expensive gear to Asia, as I worry too much about it. I guess I'd be less worried about an old M3, or maybe even a less-expensive very used M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 25, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 25, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...With the Leica, I don't even know where the frame lines really are... nor can I properly compensate for the difference in position between the viewfinder and the lens... true but I think all these problems will diminish or disappear with familiarity (with the particular lens). I think the M would be more than fine for what you are doing. For everything the Nikon does there will be an equivalent, which you may have to put a little thought into, and you may not find it at first, but this will add to the creativity in the end and should be reflected in the pictures. If you had started out on rangefinders you would probably find the Nikon offputting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted November 26, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 26, 2009 save up for the M9 then you would have the WATE at full frame and auto bracketing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMyers Posted November 26, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted November 26, 2009 Actually, it's the other way 'round. I did start out with rangefinders, and used more of then than I can ever recall right now... Contax, Nikon, Leica, Robot, and on and on... To me, they were like second nature. Then I got the Nikon F, and things changed. However, the M8 got me back into the RF cameras. I will never say anything is "impossible", but what I'm really trying to replicate here is what I would like to do with a 4x5 film camera with a ground glass viewing screen and all the adjustments, on a tripod of course, and with me "arranging" the composition until it's perfect, using as much of the image area as possible to avoid cropping too much later on. The only way I can really see doing this with the M8 would be to buy one of those Visoflex housings I used to read about. If I get past that problem, then I'm into trying to do HDR photography with an M8... I think I'd need an M9 to do the bracketing, and even then it would never take the 3, 5, 7, or 9 shots as easily as my Nikon. I'll go and post something in the film or processing forum, and see what people do about scanning their images. If I start using my M3 again, I'll want a way to get good quality high-resolution scans, even when I'm overseas. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted November 26, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 26, 2009 true but I think all these problems will diminish or disappear with familiarity (with the particular lens). I think the M would be more than fine for what you are doing. For everything the Nikon does there will be an equivalent, which you may have to put a little thought into, and you may not find it at first, but this will add to the creativity in the end and should be reflected in the pictures. If you had started out on rangefinders you would probably find the Nikon offputting. This reminds me of the joke whose punchline is "Standing, in a hammock." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted November 26, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 26, 2009 I will never say anything is "impossible", but what I'm really trying to replicate here is what I would like to do with a 4x5 film camera with a ground glass viewing screen and all the adjustments, on a tripod of course, and with me "arranging" the composition until it's perfect, using as much of the image area as possible to avoid cropping too much later on. The only way I can really see doing this with the M8 would be to buy one of those Visoflex housings I used to read about. . I understand your thinking here, as I too come from the days of film, and I too am one of those people who try to get everything right before I release the shutter. BUT, there is one factor of digital photography that reduces most of these differences between camera types. And this is especially true for still-life studies.This is that you can review the result instantly on the back of the camera. (Or on a computer if you have one handy.) I'm still trying to remember this aspect myself, and very often forget to review my photographs until many hours later. (Possibly because I still use film too.) Each camera type has it's strengths and weaknesses, and none are perfect for everything. I use my Nikons for those times when I need very wide or long lenses,(And certain other cases where the Nikons excel.) and my Leica for when I don't. (Sometimes I carry both, as the Leica is such a joy to use.) I even carry a small compact camera in my handbag for those times where small size is more important, or for making videos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 26, 2009 Share #12 Posted November 26, 2009 If I get past that problem, then I'm into trying to do HDR photography with an M8... I think I'd need an M9 to do the bracketing, and even then it would never take the 3, 5, 7, or 9 shots as easily as my Nikon. . Autobracketing on the M9 has a choice of 3,5 or 7 shots and a choice of increments of 0.5 , 1, 1.5 or 2EV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostomos Posted November 26, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 26, 2009 Salve! Check again Chris Weeks documentation about street photography and you know again, with camera to choose! Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 26, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 26, 2009 This reminds me of the joke whose punchline is "Standing, in a hammock." sorry, don't know this one! The original problem has also gone over my head, I guess because I am not familiar enough with the SLR and the differences. I know the framelines are only accurate at one distance, but you mean the M system can't do a great job with a wide interior or a food close-up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 26, 2009 Share #15 Posted November 26, 2009 Actually, it's the other way 'round. I did start out with rangefinders... sorry did not mean to jump to conclusions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMyers Posted November 27, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted November 27, 2009 Sorry for the confusion - you're all right, of course. Yes, by reviewing things on the rear LCD I can continue to re-arrange things until they look right. That would work, but isn't a substitute for the viewfinder. If I ignore the viewfinder, and use the rear LCD as a ground glass, I guess that could work reasonably well. Jaap, I asked the Leica representatives at the recent show in NY about HDR. With the Nikon, I can set the camera to "bracketing for X number of images", turn on high-speed burst, press the shutter button and just hold it down - and the camera will take all seven images (or whatever) and stop. With the M9 I've got to press the button 7 times, waiting for the buffer to empty of course. I might as well use the M8 and just adjust the lens aperture between shots. Yes, it can do it, but the Nikon makes it effortless. None of this is an issue.... I could eliminate all my difficulties by simply bringing both camera systems on my trip to Asia. In my case, I wanted to try to do it all with one camera, and the "logical" choice (not my preference) was to bring the Nikon. Ken Rockwell's words come to mind - it's not the camera, it's "convenience". If I didn't have the Nikon with me, and only had my M8, I think I'd still be able to get all my work done, (and then have it around for the photos that *I* wanted to take!!!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted November 27, 2009 Share #17 Posted November 27, 2009 sorry, don't know this one! The original problem has also gone over my head, I guess because I am not familiar enough with the SLR and the differences. I know the framelines are only accurate at one distance, but you mean the M system can't do a great job with a wide interior or a food close-up? The "standing, in a hammock" joke has to do with a man who boasts about always doing things in the most difficult way possible (I'll leave you to guess what he does in the hammock, except that his girlfriend is there too). Yes, you can do a great many unusual things with a Leica - but seldom as easily and flexibly as you can with the right SLR outfit. Close-up food photography is an example: the SLR shows you the exact framing, perspective and relationships between objects in the image, while the RF finder shows approximate framing and - thanks to parallax - a different perspective and relationship between objects. The SLR gives you an approximate preview of DOF (which is of course critical when close-up) and the RF gives you none. The SLR lets you use a tilt/shift lens for better control of DOF and perspective, while the RF doesn't. And so on. I'm not trying to talk down RF cameras. I use my M8 more than any other camera. But it seems silly to pretend that they're more versatile than they really are, or that it's somehow morally or aesthetically better to try to overcome the Leica's limitations than to use the best tool for the job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 27, 2009 Share #18 Posted November 27, 2009 ...to be fair, he did not mention wanting adjustments until later... ...seems silly to pretend that they're more versatile than they really are, or that it's somehow morally or aesthetically better to try to overcome the Leica's limitations than to use the best tool for the job. ...was just suggesting he adapt the composition to the rangefinder, not the rangefinder to the composition. And was assuming he would use the digital M for other things besides close up to justify it. "Best tool for the job" and "horses for courses" is o.k. here I guess, but can lead to everyone having about the same equipment and taking the same kind of pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted November 28, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 28, 2009 "Best tool for the job" and "horses for courses" is o.k. here I guess, but can lead to everyone having about the same equipment and taking the same kind of pictures. Even more so if everyone just has a Leica and two or three lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 28, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 28, 2009 touche / Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.