Deterministic photography

[enboe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Always hard to add something that has been unsaid in these forums, but I'll give it a shot.

 

I have now spent two full days of shooting with the X1. If I were to wrap up it's advantages over other fixed-lens automatics, dare I say point & shoots, it is that the X1 is a deterministic camera. A little more dialog is perhaps appropriate.

 

The first shooting day was at Universal Studio's Wizarding World of Harry Potter. All of the buildings except the castle itself have snow-covered roofs, which causes most meters to underexpose. I used the screen on the back of the X1 and dialed in the exposure compensation until it looked good on the screen. When I looked at the photos at home on the Mac, they were indeed correctly exposed. Having a tool where you can count on the results turning out the way you expect is what I call a deterministic camera.

 

Yesterday was day two shooting in a park. I added the X1 optical finder since the first day. I found that having direct controls for shutter, aperture, and flash were very quick and convenient. I did find out that I should have used the screen for close macro pictures, a simple lesson learned. Again, when I wanted to achieve a setting, such as wide-aperture or fill-flash, the camera quickly responded to those controls, and the results matched expectations.

 

Is it equal to a full M8 or M9? No, but it is a very capable and convenient tool that will produce excellent, predictable results.

 

Happy shooting.

[Advertisement]

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

[phancj]

Always hard to add something that has been unsaid in these forums, but I'll give it a shot.

 

I have now spent two full days of shooting with the X1. If I were to wrap up it's advantages over other fixed-lens automatics, dare I say point & shoots, it is that the X1 is a deterministic camera. A little more dialog is perhaps appropriate.

 

The first shooting day was at Universal Studio's Wizarding World of Harry Potter. All of the buildings except the castle itself have snow-covered roofs, which causes most meters to underexpose. I used the screen on the back of the X1 and dialed in the exposure compensation until it looked good on the screen. When I looked at the photos at home on the Mac, they were indeed correctly exposed. Having a tool where you can count on the results turning out the way you expect is what I call a deterministic camera.

 

Yesterday was day two shooting in a park. I added the X1 optical finder since the first day. I found that having direct controls for shutter, aperture, and flash were very quick and convenient. I did find out that I should have used the screen for close macro pictures, a simple lesson learned. Again, when I wanted to achieve a setting, such as wide-aperture or fill-flash, the camera quickly responded to those controls, and the results matched expectations.

 

Is it equal to a full M8 or M9? No, but it is a very capable and convenient tool that will produce excellent, predictable results.

 

Happy shooting.

 

Well said. I think the colors are also very accurate especially for jpegs out of the camera so photos are instantly useable.

 

Frankly I havent bought the viewfinder yet, tried the voightlander not the leica yet. How often do you actually NEED to use it? Coz I shoot in bright sunlight too but even then although the screen looks a little washed out it is still enough for framing. Apart from costs I find that the viewfinder adds bulk. What do you think? I know many of us are used to dslrs or cams with viewfinders but in the case of X1 is one necessary apart from habit? I am seriously thinking about the viewfinder, but do not want to waste hard-earned cash on something I may use less often. Your take on this? Thanks.

[NZDavid]

You are lucky you could use the screen. In bright light (which is most of the time here) I find it simply impossible to see what's on the screen, let alone use it to determine exposure. The little Voigtländer finder is a goodie, though, and of course also fits the M cameras. I absolutely agree about the simple film speed and shutter controls -- virtually no other camera except the M has this simple control system now.

[phancj]

You are lucky you could use the screen. In bright light (which is most of the time here) I find it simply impossible to see what's on the screen, let alone use it to determine exposure. The little Voigtländer finder is a goodie, though, and of course also fits the M cameras. I absolutely agree about the simple film speed and shutter controls -- virtually no other camera except the M has this simple control system now.

 

My eyesight is not very good actually, but I can definitely frame in bright sunlight but colors look washed out. I live in SE Asia where it is summer all year round and unless raining it is always blazing sun??

 

Tried the voightlander, is it an issue coz the thing is so tight on the horseshoe I thought it may damage it?

[NZDavid]

The quality of light varies hugely from country to country and can be measured in degrees Kelvin, with noonday sun ranging from 5,000 to 5,400K. In my experience England has very soft light producing muted colors; the Mediterranean sun is intense; the south of France, which is the same latitude as New Zealand, produces a similar look; Scandinavian sunlight is pure and clear and the closest to New Zealand light; Germany has muted light (making it much easier to view that LCD); SE Asian light is generally softer than here (but very strong with the sun overhead in Singapore); harshest, fiercest light is in the Australian Outback (I guess similar to Arizona).

 

One could argue that the best pictures are never produced outdoors in bright sunshine. Possibly. And of course in low light and indoors there's never a problem seeing an LCD. I find it's a limiting factor with any camera and feel it's a shame virtually all compact cameras have now done away with optical finders. I really like the finder on the M, which is always clear no matter what the light level. The Voigtländer is extremely well made and fits well on the X1 (I am sure you meant to say "hotshoe" unless you are taking it to the rodeo)!

[phancj]

The quality of light varies hugely from country to country and can be measured in degrees Kelvin, with noonday sun ranging from 5,000 to 5,400K. In my experience England has very soft light producing muted colors; the Mediterranean sun is intense; the south of France, which is the same latitude as New Zealand, produces a similar look; Scandinavian sunlight is pure and clear and the closest to New Zealand light; Germany has muted light (making it much easier to view that LCD); SE Asian light is generally softer than here (but very strong with the sun overhead in Singapore); harshest, fiercest light is in the Australian Outback (I guess similar to Arizona).

 

One could argue that the best pictures are never produced outdoors in bright sunshine. Possibly. And of course in low light and indoors there's never a problem seeing an LCD. I find it's a limiting factor with any camera and feel it's a shame virtually all compact cameras have now done away with optical finders. I really like the finder on the M, which is always clear no matter what the light level. The Voigtländer is extremely well made and fits well on the X1 (I am sure you meant to say "hotshoe" unless you are taking it to the rodeo)!

 

haha david yes, you hit it on the nail, I do actually reside in Singapore now, and have shot in the bright noon sun with the LCD. Colors are washed out but framing is still very possible.

 

yes I mean hotshoe (fast typing and lack of sleep isnt helping:p). The voightlander I tried was very tight. But I noticed the build quality is very good, all metal and sturdy.

[enboe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have given the screen-only shooting style the nickname the Frankenstein technique. Yes, the camera is 100% usable with the screen alone, but every time you stick your arms out, especially if you are also walking at the same time, you draw some additional attention to yourself that holding a camera to your face does not. It is for this reason that I prefer to use an optical viewfinder.

 

You also queried size. The X1 and finder is as tall as an M, but significantly lighter, and also much less bulk than if you add an SF24 flash to the M. I find the combination much more satisfying than any point and shoot to date. Did I mention framing accuracy? An optical finder on the X1 is much, much more precise than even the high-end compacts like the Canon G series. Again, the phrase deterministic photography, getting what you asked for and expected, comes to mind.

 

Voigtlander vs Leica? I don't own the Voigtlander finder, but many others here of high integrity speak well of it. I would not hesitate to use one for a moment.

 

Other accessory comments:

 

I also purchased the wrist strap and found it decent, although I don't think you'd want to spin and twirl the camera much on a simple thread. It's there for drop and snatch protection, that is all. A walking style is to have the camera cupped in your right hand, wrist strap attached, so you're ready for the quick shot, and also to be able to maneuver the camera through pushy crowds (did I mention park crowds get pushy?)

 

Failures: I purchased the promaster 3" hard (?) plastic screen cover and put it on the factory-fresh camera. The $15 piece of plastic had multiple dents and scratches from the plastic buttons of an Izod brand golf shirt after only one day. It protected my camera screen, but failed my durability expectations. I have switched to peel-off skins (Hoodmaster?) which have protected my M-digital screens without fail.

 

More failures: I tried the Fogg M pouch (no longer in production) and found it too tight. The eyepiece of the finder was rubbing undesirably upon every entry and exit cycle, and would have been destroyed in just a couple of days.

 

Happy shooting.

 

Eric

[RichardM8]

Good starting post indeed.

 

The accurate, consistant metering, AF and (thus) predictable results are one of the strongest points of the X1 imo. And what really sets it apart from run of the mill P&S cameras (besides stellar IQ that is). Add the elegant and simple controls and you have a recipe for a serious piece of equipement. Only after some 1500 frames or so I practically know how the image will look like when I press the shutter release. Surprises in either direction are rare. Very, VERY good.

 

I'm still undecided about an OVF. The LCD allows me to frame fine so far. Also in sunlight. At the equator or anywhere else. I don't need bright, vibrant colors to frame a picture.

I've had a 35 VL OVF on. The absence of a center mark is annoying at best. That it won't fit it's case with the OVF on, inconvenient. Makes the X1 bigger too. Hmm... Not appealing so far.

[sikde]

Not sure if this is the right place for it, but since RichardX1 brought up the point about the lack of a centre mark in OVFs, does anyone make some sort of marking on their OVF to aid in their focussing?

[F1Addict]

That's what keeps me from getting an OVF -- lack of focusing point.

 

If there's ever a solution then I might look into it.

[sikde]

I'm very tempted to use a fine tip permanent marker to make a dot where I think is the very centre of the central AF point. I believe there is some parallax error, so I've got to mount the X1 on a tripod, then lock focus on an object and shift my eye to view thru the viewfinder and then make a dot on it.

 

Has anyone done this before?

[BB W]

Thoughtful thread. I've had this camera for about three weeks now, and although I sometimes get frustrated, my frustration is not with the camera but, rather, with myself.

 

I did buy the OVF, the Leica one and I do think it's very bright and clear, but I am not quite at one with it yet. I'm not sure that I've ever used an optical viewfinder before. I'm not quite sure how the placing of the dot on the viewfinder would work...especially if one moves the focus/metering point around, though I have yet to do that myself.

[prk60091]

I'm very tempted to use a fine tip permanent marker to make a dot where I think is the very centre of the central AF point. I believe there is some parallax error, so I've got to mount the X1 on a tripod, then lock focus on an object and shift my eye to view thru the viewfinder and then make a dot on it.

 

Has anyone done this before?

 

You go first

[JeTexas]

After about three weeks of shooting with the X1 I've started to trust it. I gave up on the face-detect feature and leave the auto-focus set to center. It definitely gives me the fastest results, and I half-cock the shutter for focus, then wait for the perfect moment.

 

At times I have been a little bit frustrated with the photo preview screen not returning to the focus screen fast enough, but I guess maybe I should try shooting in continuous mode to offset this. I haven't experimented with that yet.

 

Manual focus is great for speeding things up when focus is at infinity. However, I'm still having some trouble getting fast with the thumb wheel. I think rack focus is faster because you're not limited in your travel of the initital focusing. The thumb screw doesn't provide for a quick change from one end of the field to another. I also have a love-hate relationship with the focus-assist function. My eyes aren't good enough to see the fine detail on the screen without it, but sometimes it's zoomed too close, so that there's no detail in the box to use for focusing and it's just an obstruction.

 

All that being said, the image quality and sharpness I've been getting from this camera absolutely crush my Nikon D70s that I've been using professionally for the past four years. Of course, it's hardly a fair comparison in that the D70s has half the megapixels, but I've never bothered to upgrade as anything over 6mp seemed to be plenty for web shots at 72dpi and print work at 300dpi.

 

I spent the weekend shooting bouncy boats from a bouncy boat, and I had great success.

 

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!

 

 

However, I'm going to have to adapt the way I shoot events. I tend to utilize a zoom to crop the photos and shoot people candidly from a bit of a distance. With the X1, I'm going to have to get closer, which means more people smiling and waving to the camera. Oh well, it's a tradeoff.

[wda]

I did buy the OVF, the Leica one and I do think it's very bright and clear, but I am not quite at one with it yet. I'm not sure that I've ever used an optical viewfinder before. I'm not quite sure how the placing of the dot on the viewfinder would work...especially if one moves the focus/metering point around, though I have yet to do that myself.

I was about to respond to the OP about use of the viewfinder. Mine always lives on the camera; I use it most of the time. However, indoors and at closer ranges, the LCD is more accurate.

 

Using the camera and viewfinder enables me to hold the camera much steadier than stretched at arm's length. That is one good reason to use the OVF. It also makes you rather less conspicuous which can be important in some locations.

 

I set the focus point at the menu top setting which gives a useful but small area for aligning the focus point. It is more versatile than spot focusing and much less confusing than using multi-points for focusing. With practice I can now visualize the centre point, at mid to long ranges, with near 100% accuracy. As I said, at closer ranges I resort to using the LCD which lights up at the touch of the Info button.

 

Taking the above question, I place the imaginary centre point on the critical focus point in my image; take a half-pressure to lock focus; re-frame and shoot. For important subjects I repeat this two or three times to ensure I get the perfect shot. It minimizes ruination by unwanted transient facial expressions or gestures etc.

 

I hope that helps those uncertain about the benefits of the OVF.

[jsrockit]

I think the OVF is a nesessity...even if only for those moments when you can't see the screen. AND this is coming from a person who feels composing with an LCD is actually beneficial.

[eelekim]

Yes, OVF is really good. For me, I don't look like a zombie or Frankenstein anymore. It arouses less attention. People also can't watch what I'm shooting by the LCD. And I have a more intimate feeling towards the picture that I'm trying to grab. With my another eye closed, I can ignore the world outside the frame, which is good in the way that I'm not affected by all the curious, unhappy or angry looks around...

[JanCderidder]

I had a Mid-Point engraved by my local optician, they have the instruments for this, not only are they able to find the exact mid-point, they can also make the "point/mark" very neat.

 

I then calibrated the mid-point of the screen and that of the OVF at 3 different distances.... hardly surprising the accuracy is very good and mid and long and just a tad of at short distances. I also use the smallest possible focus point and after some training it functions very well. I use it now for most of my images, it really enhances the X1' use.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[F1Addict]

I had a Mid-Point engraved by my local optician, they have the instruments for this, not only are they able to find the exact mid-point, they can also make the "point/mark" very neat.

 

I then calibrated the mid-point of the screen and that of the OVF at 3 different distances.... hardly surprising the accuracy is very good and mid and long and just a tad of at short distances. I also use the smallest possible focus point and after some training it functions very well. I use it now for most of my images, it really enhances the X1' use.

 

Thanks, this makes a lot of sense. Definitely better than using a Sharpie!

 

I'm imagining using it this way and can definitely see the benefit. Guess it's time to start looking at OVFs. Thanks for opening my eyes on this.

[prk60091]

I had a Mid-Point engraved by my local optician, they have the instruments for this, not only are they able to find the exact mid-point, they can also make the "point/mark" very neat.

 

I then calibrated the mid-point of the screen and that of the OVF at 3 different distances.... hardly surprising the accuracy is very good and mid and long and just a tad of at short distances. I also use the smallest possible focus point and after some training it functions very well. I use it now for most of my images, it really enhances the X1' use.

 

I must have my stoopid hat on tonight....what exactly are you calibrating and how.