A Sane Attitude to Rededge

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm... so you can see all sides of the 28mm framelines at once without drilling your head into the camera? You can get a precise view at a relaxed position? That's good for you because I can't and I don't even wear glasses. When doing my "research" I read a lot of comments (also from you) how using even 24mm without a viewfinder was no big deal. Well, compared to what I'm used to it is a big deal regarding framing precision. But I realise (and already conceded) that it is my fault alone not trying the system in question before and instead going from the experience of others.

 

Glad we agree on the well known but unadvertised color consitency problem, though.

 

I always advise people considering getting into the M system to purchase or borrow an M6 first and shoot a few rolls of film before plonking down for an M8/9. It's an entirely different way of working than an slr (which is why I use both). M's are considered traditionally loose and sloppy street cameras. It's all about the unexpected compositions resulting from not knowing precisely what you are getting that make them unique. Why all of a sudden people want them to replace their slr's and be architecture, sports, etc etc cameras is beyond me.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[DennisK]

OK, this thread is about the red edge problem, so it was wrong to bring the general wide angle compromises inherent in the M system into it. I only did because I knew beforehand that the M9 was no camera for telephoto, macro or fisheye applications. But I only later found out, that it's not ideally suited to wide angle either. Some reasons for this stem from the rangefinder system itself and could be known beforehand through proper product research (yes, at which I surprisingly failed). One should be safe to assume though that a high end camera like the M9 can produce consistent colors with all its own system lenses - which it can't and probably never will.

 

For me the best approach to the red edge problem is to not use the M9 below 28mm. It's a bummer but I'll live - an attitude that's relatively sane, I think. I wonder what Leicas attitude regarding the messy colors is?

[DennisK]

Charles, your advice is certainly sound. But:

 

It's all about the unexpected compositions resulting from not knowing precisely what you are getting that make them unique.

 

Do you really get that vibe from the product brochure for the M9?

[adan]

True - if you want a small, lightweight SLR, buy a Canon Rebel or an Olympus. If you want a rangefinder, buy an M9.

 

At a workshop, the Magnum/Nat. Geographic photographer David Alan Harvey told us "Rangefinders are as different from SLRs as SLRs are different from view cameras. A different kind of seeing."

 

The limits can be pushed - Fred Maroon shot a whole book on the architecture of Washington D.C. using Leica rangefinders as well as SLRs: Fred Maroon - but then he got his start pre-SLR-era, so he didn't have SLR preconceptions. It was "learn how to use an RF for anything - or starve." So he learned how.

[jaapv]

OK, this thread is about the red edge problem, so it was wrong to bring the general wide angle compromises inherent in the M system into it. I only did because I knew beforehand that the M9 was no camera for telephoto, macro or fisheye applications. But I only later found out, that it's not ideally suited to wide angle either. Some reasons for this stem from the rangefinder system itself and could be known beforehand through proper product research (yes, at which I surprisingly failed). One should be safe to assume though that a high end camera like the M9 can produce consistent colors with all its own system lenses - which it can't and probably never will.

 

For me the best approach to the red edge problem is to not use the M9 below 28mm. It's a bummer but I'll live - an attitude that's relatively sane, I think. I wonder what Leicas attitude regarding the messy colors is?

Well, as was discussed here, the Zeiss Biogon 21/2.8 does pretty well on the M9, and is arguably as good a lens as the Elmarit asph.

[charlesphoto99]

Charles, your advice is certainly sound. But:

 

 

 

Do you really get that vibe from the product brochure for the M9?

 

No. but I get it from having shot rangefinders (both M and medium format) since about 1989. Not to mention looking at the work of Gary Winogrand, HCB, David Alan Harvey, Lee Friedlander, Alex Webb and so on. I wouldn't judge ANYTHING by a company's brochure (they always try and present it in the best light, no matter how crap it might be).

 

But it is a bummer they can't sort out the wide angle problem. But keep in mind if in a pinch you can use Cornerfix. A PITA for processing a lot of images but for the several that might go to press or be fine art blow ups it works well.

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

True - if you want a small, lightweight SLR, buy a Canon Rebel or an Olympus. If you want a rangefinder, buy an M9.

 

At a workshop, the Magnum/Nat. Geographic photographer David Alan Harvey told us "Rangefinders are as different from SLRs as SLRs are different from view cameras. A different kind of seeing."

 

The limits can be pushed - Fred Maroon shot a whole book on the architecture of Washington D.C. using Leica rangefinders as well as SLRs: Fred Maroon - but then he got his start pre-SLR-era, so he didn't have SLR preconceptions. It was "learn how to use an RF for anything - or starve." So he learned how.

 

I was being general. Of course one can push the limits of anything and often that's what makes the best photos. A couple of years ago I released a book of photographs of breakdancers all shot with medium format Mamiya 6/7 and Hassie SWC. Would have been a lot easier with a dslr but not as unique.

 

But for middle of the road client work it's often best to just use the best tool suited for the job. They usually don't care if your wide angle lens cost $1K or $6k. Just make it look good.

[ho_co]

... in practice the C lenses seem to perform perfectly well on M bodies.

John--

Make that "on many, but not all M bodies."

 

I've got two M5s on which the C lenses don't focus right, and I know of one forum member on whose M9 the C lenses don't work properly.

 

 

But that's not a good analogy, because that was a physical change to the focusing cam of the lens which would render the rangefinder inaccurate on 25% of the M bodies then in the field.

 

The red edge problem isn't predictable.

 

That is, you can tell by looking into the throat of an M body whether it will work accurately with C lenses. You can't tell by looking at an M9 whether it will exhibit red edge.

[giordano]

You can't tell by looking at an M9 whether it will exhibit red edge.

 

Thanks for the correction.

[viramati]

A question for the Technical experts. Would it be possible (technically that is) to fit a cmos sensor to an M9 or are the specific reasons why it can't be done and they had to use a ccd sensor

[jaapv]

Leica fitted a CCD sensor for image quality reasons. They will only use CMos when there are other considerations, like the X1.

[Nikkor AIS]

Andy: I used to own the Nikkor 21 F 4 and finder. One one Nikon best. It was glued to an old Nikon F film camera. No barrel distortion and amazing sharpness. And if I could figure out how to keep the mirror locked up after I exposer on my D3 I would find another copy.

The fact that every other of my 20 Nikkor AI/ AIS from 8mm-800mm work on my D3 is a testament to Nikon commitment to the older glass with newer Nikon DSLR. I will concede that it's the one lens i wish I could use with my D3's. Oh well until figure it out I guess I just have to suffer with the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 AFS:p.

 

Getting back to the discussion at hand, this red edge problem of the M9 is more than a little problematic. I cant image submitting the images I got with the 21/f 4 to a client without being ashamed. Between that and the unavailability of the lecia M9 has me not buying in. For others that can find a M9 body and got the cake to buy the new 21/1.4 and a M9 Im sure it not a problem.

The thing is Im so happy with the results Im getting with my film M's and my Nikon digital system at this point I could care a less if they fix the problem or not.

Off to go take some pictures

 

 

LeIca M6 21/4 Ektar 100

 

Gregory

[vanhulsenbeek]

???. I am lost here.

Did you make pictures with a Nikkor 21/4 on the M9?

Or do you mean the Super Angulon? It is established that that lens may not work well with digital M's: rear element to close to sensor. No news there.

Do you have a M9 at all? ("not buying in...')

What do we learn from the picture made with a M6? (LeIca M6 21/4 Ektar 100, your quote including typo)

[jaapv]

I agree, Sander, it is totally OT. But no matter. Will we see you tomorrow?

[Jerry_R]

In LFI magazine (2/2010) there is article about 35mm lens for "S" system. They point as a success - no color distortion on big sensor.

That once again tells me they are and were aware of the color issues - as a distortion in general. Including M9. Would it mean - they treat "S" more seriously?

 

 

PS:

Someone few posts earlier says, that would never buy a product based on BROCHURE.

Sure, but when you read info about releasing M9 on tens of serious photography portals, when producer is PROUD of finally offering body and full frame sensor who works with with wide angle - how you can expect any issues?

 

How you can expect issue, when the one aspect we talk about - is sold and repeated as a SUCCESS?

[mjh]

In LFI magazine (2/2010) there is article about 35mm lens for "S" system. They point as a success - no color distortion on big sensor.

That once again tells me they are and were aware of the color issues - as a distortion in general. Including M9. Would it mean - they treat "S" more seriously?

That’s jumping to conclusions I’m afraid. There is no way you could relate the performance of a wide-angle lens for a medium-format DSLR to issues with wide-angle lenses for a digital rangefinder camera. Not to mention that color shift and distortion are completely different phenomena.

[Jerry_R]

What is color distortion?

[mjh]

What is color distortion?

I have no idea; it’s not a term I am familiar with. (Lateral chromatic aberration could be construed as a kind of color distortion, though.)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jerry_R]

It was used by LFI, that is reason I ask.

Good night!

[mjh]

It was used by LFI, that is reason I ask.

Not in the original German version of the article.