M8 RF Camera Frustration

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've got three kinds of cameras - M8 RF, Nikon DSLR, and Canon P&S. For most of my early life, I used RF film cameras. Long story, but this progressed up to a D3 which does everything automatically except for maybe making coffee in the morning.

 

I love the M8, and when I'm just going places trying to do what I normally do, I now take the M8 along, not the big bulky D3, and also not the pocketable Canon.

 

I was thinking that a camera is just a camera, and I can do most anything with the Leica, but I'm finding out all the difficult things that led me to go the SLR route many years back. I'll just post two examples.

 

I was at a friend's house a few days ago, and there were some cute kittens outside that I tried to photograph. What I wanted was photos from their level, which meant the camera being down on the ground. This makes it a wee bit difficult to compose the scene, let alone focus, so I guessed at both, and took lots of photos. With my DSLR I would have used the right-angle finder on the camera, so i could look down into it. With the P&S I could have just watched the screen on the back, and snapped the shutter at the right time. The camera would have taken care of the focusing. Well, I did get "a picture"; out of 60, 58 got deleted, one was nice, but so-so, and only one came out the way I wanted it to.

 

 

Later that evening I went to a radio control car racetrack, where they run cars under the lights - and not that many lights. I had taken photos here the week before using my D3, setting the ISO speed up to 24,000 or so, which sounds ridiculous but which worked out just fine. I didn't expect this to work with the Leica, but wanted to try it out anyway. What a disaster. That there wasn't enough light goes without saying - I bumped the ISO speed up to 1250 anyway, and finally got to where I could get a decent exposure. The other problem is that nothing was "sharp". This is with the 35mm f/1.4, and while I love what it does in good light, at nighttime it was terrible - or I was. It got to where I didn't even know if it was focusing properly, so I did a bunch of test for that. Making a long story short, I gave up on making any decent photos, and just took a lot to see what I could or could not do. I know, it's also true that with so little light, any of my older film cameras would have had the same problems, but I now realize I have gotten too spoiled with the new DSLR capability.

 

I love the M8, but I don't see it as being a replacement for my other camera gear. To me, it's an addition, and all the cameras have their strong points.

 

I keep telling myself that the camera is only a tool, and what counts is the photos, not the camera. Well, I've got lots of tools, and each has its own purpose. You use the right tool for the job, not just the one you happen to have. I love the M8, but there are things that I just don't know how to do with it yet. Maybe after a lot more practice I'll do better.

[Guest imported_torben]

Count me in (even though I now shoot an M9)

[Nicoleica]

I agree with Mike. No camera is perfect for every occasion, all have their strong points, and all have their weaknesses. The 'M' has very many strengths, although I do not think that chasing fast moving fur-balls around the floor is one of them. (I love the picture that you posted though. Well done! ) The modern DSLR has many strengths too, but you pay the twin penalties of size and weight for these. (I believe that the forthcoming D3e will have an espresso maker built in.) While it is often possible to achieve the same results with any camera, there are times when a specific type is far more suitable and convenient than another.

[perb]

With my DSLR I would have used the right-angle finder on the camera

 

Leica make an "Angle finder M" (order no. 12531) that screws onto the eyepiece thread

 

 

using my D3, setting the ISO speed up to 24,000

 

Well, the Nikon D3 outshines all other popular DSLR's for high ISO, including their own D3x, as well as the M8/M9.

 

It has been proposed several times on this forum that Leica should make a variant of the digital M with the same pixel size/number as used by the D3 for high ISO performance, so that M users, just like Nikon users, can choose camera for resolution or high ISO.

 

Regards

Per

[thompsonkirk]

Pardon a tiny note of sarcasm, but most carpenters find that their chisels don't pound nails very well either.

 

Personally, I'm frustrated because my old view camera used to make better contact prints than my M's.

 

Kirk

[dcoombs]

...I keep telling myself that the camera is only a tool, and what counts is the photos, not the camera. Well, I've got lots of tools, and each has its own purpose. You use the right tool for the job, not just the one you happen to have. I love the M8, but there are things that I just don't know how to do with it yet. Maybe after a lot more practice I'll do better.

 

I think you answered your own question (if, that is, you were posing one). Right tool for each job. BTW, those kittens must have had the patience of Job! 60 shots?

 

Doug

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nicoleica, thanks!

 

Perb, ditto! (I tried to find a finder, and couldn't). Is this what you mean:

Leica Angle Viewfinder M 12531 - B&H Photo Video

It's also shown here:

Leica angle viewfinder - Shop sales, stores & prices at TheFind.com

Somehow, this looks to me like something that goes onto the accessory shoe, which would make focusing a tad difficult...

 

thompsonkirk - why would a view camera make a better contact print than a M (film) camera? Based on what contact prints used to be used for, seeing multiple images quickly and picking the best one, I would think that the M makes better contact prints than a view camera.

 

 

I went through all this a lifetime ago, but back then all I knew was film cameras that I could afford in the 1960's. The limits were based on the technology, and your personal ability to make the most of that technology. Even back then (especially back then??) I remember reading articles about which type of camera was "best". I chose 35mm RF, but did have others to use once in a while.

[john_newell]

I love the M8, and when I'm just going places trying to do what I normally do, I now take the M8 along, not the big bulky D3, and also not the pocketable Canon.

 

I love the M8, but I don't see it as being a replacement for my other camera gear. To me, it's an addition, and all the cameras have their strong points.

 

This should not be a surprise - it was the same with film cameras. The digital Ms still fit right in.

[perb]

Is this what you mean:

Leica Angle Viewfinder M 12531 - B&H Photo Video

It's also shown here:

Leica angle viewfinder - Shop sales, stores & prices at TheFind.com

Somehow, this looks to me like something that goes onto the accessory shoe, which would make focusing a tad difficult...

 

Yes, that's it, but it does attach to the eyepiece thread, same as a diopter lens or a magnifier, not the shoe.

 

Regards

Per

[wstotler]

<snip>What I wanted was photos from their level, which meant the camera being down on the ground. *This makes it a wee bit difficult to compose the scene, let alone focus, so I guessed at both, and took lots of photos. *

 

<snip>

 

What a disaster. *That there wasn't enough light goes without saying - I bumped the ISO speed up to 1250 anyway, and finally got to where I could get a decent exposure. *The other problem is that nothing was "sharp". *This is with the 35mm f/1.4, and while I love what it does in good light, at nighttime it was terrible - or I was. *It got to where I didn't even know if it was focusing properly, so I did a bunch of test for that.

 

<snip> *

 

I love the M8, but there are things that I just don't know how to do with it yet. *Maybe after a lot more practice I'll do better.

 

 

I hear your frustration. The first focusing problem has a solution. The second, I'm not sure because light is light. But, probably. I wasn't there so I can't say for sure.

 

Both of the following work with f/1.2, so f/1.4, f/2, or f/2.8 should improve results.

 

Focus Technique One: Kneel. Look down at object through RF. Focus. Bring the camera straight down from your eye in a plane to the ground, then move it just a little forward of the edge of your chin. Rest camera, tilit upwards a tad if you have a case on it. Shoot.

 

Keepers = 1 shot, 1 kept.

 

Examples:

Rachael Maria - It's Gravity on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Rachael Maria - Gravity Cross Far on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Amber C. - Dim Reflection on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

-->> Have lots more of these. Works every time. And on walls/ceilings. Slightly tilting the camera minimizes the ground or wall. I bought the Leica tabletop tripod with ballhead, used that, and then figured out I could do virtually the same tricks without it.

 

 

Focus Technique Two (variant of technique one): Focus on object. Like eyelight in an eyeball. Then imagine the camera is now connected to the thing on which you focused by a freely pivotable bar that begins at the focus point. E.g., the camera is on the surface of an imaginary sphere with the centerpoint being the focused-upon point. Move the camera over the surface of the imaginary sphere in any direction while keeping the lens pointed at the center. Shoot.

 

Keepers = 4 shot, 1 kept.

 

Examples:

Amber C. - Lined on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Zahra Femi - Gravity Lean II on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

-->> Still working on mastery of this technique. Framing is what socks me, not focus.

 

Both techniques take lots of practice. You'll also learn the framing for a given lens, too, as you go. If you already have that, you just need to nail the focus technique.

 

People largely use these techniques when "zone focusing" at f/5.6 or f/8. I want to use them at f/1.2 and f/2, close.

 

Would a tiltable screen be better? Yes, to start. But if I can really master the technique--and I have the hang of it now--I won't need one. Much faster. Framing is what's holding me back from having more keepers. I'll get that nailed eventually.

 

 

OK--to your light problem. I shoot at no higher than ISO 640, but 320 or 160 mostly. 1250 is too noisy for my taste. And, if you shoot at 1250 when you push in post the noise gets way, way worse. I can comfortably bump color two to three stops in initial post-processing and then again by two stops with a tool like Viveza, if I must. For items that will go through B&W conversion, I can push four stops in initial post-processing then three more with a tool like Viveza. So that's five or seven stops push, respectively. This does assume that what's being inputted has detail in the shadows that can be brought up. With 1/30th of a second handheld and f/1.2, the technique works even for very, very low EV light readings, like 2 and 3.

 

The following examples were shot with only a single 20-watt ceiling bulb with f/1.2 and 1/22nd and 1/45th, respectively, at ISO 160 then bumped 2.5 stops in post, blackpoint edged down:

 

Keepers = 10 shot, 9 kept. Provided no movement OR when blur is OK.

 

Amber C. - Excerpt from a Short Film I on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Amber C. - Skyward Moment I on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

-->> Just recent examples. I was using focusing technique two for the first shot, too. I told her not even to breathe and used Lars's sniper brace-exhale-shoot method to hold steady. I do have a Thumbs Up and soft release. They help--they don't make the difference, IMO.

 

So, in any case, it's possible. But it also depends on what you want the photos to look like. I'm happy with the mood in these. The M8 can't compete with five-digit ISOs, but I'm doing OK. (Clean high ISO is my number-one request for an M10, BTW.)

 

As an aside, I've only ever once been in a situation in three years when I couldn't focus because it really was "too dark." It gets harder as it gets darker, but I always find something I can use for focus if I look. (I use the 1.25x magnifier with the f/1.2, BTW. There are claims it makes the viewfinder less bright but I haven't noticed that condition. Just me, again.)

 

Again, I feel your frustration, but I think some focusing drills and exercises could help you improve your keeper-to-loss ratio. Working manually makes for a harsh, harsh mistress. As you no doubt discovered in the 1960s. Film kicks my ass, BTW, so I have a lot of respect for film (and former film) shooters.

 

Questions welcome.

 

Cheers!

Will

[MikeMyers]

All those ideas are great! I'll try out the focusing suggestions - it has to be better than my "trial and error" technique of setting the focus to as close as it goes, then trying to keep what might be the right distance between camera and eyes... :-) The "pivoting" idea sounds like it might work very well, as long as the kitties stayed still, which usually was not the case though. Some of your photos are very imaginative! Nice!!

 

The angle adapter sounds intriguing. Anyone here own one? Can you focus through it?

 

 

dcoombs - the kittens mostly ignored me. Only on rare occasions did they pay any attention to the camera. If I clicked the shutter, they might look, and then I'd quickly take another shot while they were looking for the cause of the sound. Mama cat had no patience whatever, and walked off, waiting for the silly humans to get bored and leave. The kittens one by one left, and went to mama, at which time I left.

[rpsawin]

Nicoleica, thanks!

 

 

thompsonkirk - why would a view camera make a better contact print than a M (film) camera? Based on what contact prints used to be used for, seeing multiple images quickly and picking the best one, I would think that the M makes better contact prints than a view camera.QUOTE]

 

Actually a proof sheet is a contact print from the M. Contact printing is a process whereby a print or proof sheet is produced by placing the negative(s) in contact with the light sensitive paper and exposing them to light. The light can be from various sources and the process does not involve enlarging...it's 1-to-1. So a large format contact print certainly yeilds a more useful print, as the negative is much larger, than any 35mm contact print.

 

Best regards,

 

Bob

[earleygallery]

For your cat shots you really needed a Twin Lens Reflex or SLR with waist level finder like an F2 but the smaller screen might not have been good enough. Why o why don't Leica fit their cameras with 6X6 TLR viewfinders?!

 

As you have discovered, different cameras for different purposes - as a Pro you would know in advance what you need for a job, or as an amateur just do the best you can with what you have, as ultimately if you miss a shot it really doesn't matter too much.

[MikeMyers]

As you have discovered, different cameras for different purposes -

 

as a Pro you would know in advance what you need for a job, or

 

as an amateur just do the best you can with what you have, as ultimately if you miss a shot it really doesn't matter too much.

 

 

What do you call it, when you just pick up a Leica and go out with no particular plan in mind, just look around for things that might be interesting, and then try to do the best with whatever you've got with you? If the word existed, I guess I'd say I went "Leica-ing"... Maybe that's my new hobby, as it does describe what I'm doing. :-)

[zombii]

Pardon a tiny note of sarcasm, but most carpenters find that their chisels don't pound nails very well either.

 

Personally, I'm frustrated because my old view camera used to make better contact prints than my M's.

 

Kirk

 

Good analogy.

 

Mike, my advice is this. Read everything you can relating to the problems you're having. Shoot, shoot and shoot some more. Practice makes perfect. Be patient with yourself and the camera. Learn what it does and does not do well. Very few become good overnight. Like anything else worth doing, it takes work.

[A. Cheng]

What do you call it, when you just pick up a Leica and go out with no particular plan in mind, just look around for things that might be interesting, and then try to do the best with whatever you've got with you? If the word existed, I guess I'd say I went "Leica-ing"... Maybe that's my new hobby, as it does describe what I'm doing. :-)

 

Love this expression. Certainly leicaing is more fun than canoning or nikoning!

[MikeMyers]

I agree. I know the camera "doesn't matter", but somehow the way the Leica is designed to be used, I feel a lot more involved in creating a photo with the Leica. Yeah, canon-ing and Nikon-ing aren't the same thing. With those cameras you typically see "the picture", then zoom as needed and snap. With the Leica, there's more of a need to fire up your imagionation. :-)

 

To zombii, I find I learn a lot of things here that I'd never have found in books or magazines. For example, I wouldn't have even tried to fit a polarizing filter, until I read the tip to adjust it until the exposure meter indicates the least amount of light was getting through, then snap. In retrospect, it's so obvious - but it was anything but obvious until I read it here.

 

Trying to learn how to do new things, even if I don't do them that well at first, is like building up my dictionary of a foreign language. That experience builds, and eventually I'll be able to do much more than now. (Which is great, except that I used to do it all with a Contax IIa, Nikon SP, and Leica M2 fifty years ago... All this electronic stuff has dulled my memory and my senses...)

[A. Cheng]

Well said. Some 35 years ago I was into photography. I used a Nikormat then a Canon AE-1. They were not huge yet and were still manual focussing. As I recall, I needed to think everytime to make a shot. Then I 'quitted' the hobby. Two years ago, I play around my daughter's Canon 40D and was rather disappointed (not it's IQ though). To me, photography isn't that way. DSLRs will never be my cup of tea though I admit they make sense to a lot of people who want convenience and certain quality at the same time.

 

So I bought myself this M8 and started learning everything all over again (except film loading:)). I progress each time I go out 'Leica-ing'. I could easily miss a shot on the street because of focussing or exposure adjustment (I discipline myself not to use the A mode in order to re-learn this art). But fine, just "Leica-ing" is rewarding enough for the day, and the rest of my life I guess.

 

I even plan to get myself a M6 (TTL?) for revisiting film (a senior naturally has emotion on those grainny B&Ws). Thanks Leica for resuming my passion on photography.

[vanhulsenbeek]

Nicoleica, thanks!

 

Perb, ditto! (I tried to find a finder, and couldn't). Is this what you mean:

Leica Angle Viewfinder M 12531 - B&H Photo Video

It's also shown here:

Leica angle viewfinder - Shop sales, stores & prices at TheFind.com

Somehow, this looks to me like something that goes onto the accessory shoe, which would make focusing a tad difficult...

 

 

Mike,

 

It mounts on the viewfinder.

 

But before you order this expensive thingy without first trying it out (e.g. as an online-purchase) please realize that it shows only part of the view of the finder.

In fact it is now part of the M 90mm Macro Elmar package with the Macro adapter)

 

On my first look through it, in the shop and on the camera, I decided not to buy it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[tedwin74]

I have a big one to add, that is purely oversight or cost cutting. No sync cord plug. Wouldn't be such big deal on an SLR, but not being able to trigger a flash when using a wide angle viewfinder? Bugs me every time.

 

Another one, buffer too little. "hold on folks, I'm using a crappy camera" I say that too often waiting for the buffer to clear (plus if using the latest fast sandisk wondering if it will just lock up altogether and then have to have the battery popped to get going and see if it even recorded the images, but that never happens with a lower tech lexar)

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the camera. But as others have said, it could be better.

 

Ted.