gbindman Posted January 8, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted January 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am to receive my first Leica (M8) soon and I have been thinking about the kind of photographs I would like to shoot. I have also been wondering if the M8 will provide photographers an opportunity to make a new kind of photograph; will we offer to the world a new vision of life as seen through our viewfinders? In a 1938 New Yorker review of a Leica exhibition (the review also compares the Leica exhibition with the Press Photographers Association annual exhibition of the same year) the reviewer states "One notes a fundamental difference immediately. It is as if the latter groups (Leica commercial and amateur photographers), from having more leisure to ponder their subjects, had come to think in the same patterns: one sees repeated over and over the same "camera angles," the same effects involving deceptive reflections, odd lighting, and so on; the same genre studies." "The press photographer, on the other hand, forced to work with unstudied and unpredictable material, has developed an extraordinary capacity to seize action at the precise moment when it settles into lines of inevevitability. Even in their non-action shots the news cameramen, by and large, show definite superiority." The award winning picture that year was by Charles Hoff titled "The Hindenburg Explosion", a picture we are all familar with....my research was not able to determine whether or not he used a Leica! Any comments if we are on the cusp of something new and if so, what might it be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2007 Posted January 8, 2007 Hi gbindman, Take a look here Press Vs. Art....a 1938 Leica exhibition review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
carstenw Posted January 9, 2007 Share #2  Posted January 9, 2007 Hello Gary,  interesting post! I recommend shooting mainly "good" or "fun" pictures and avoiding the "bad" kind  Having got the bad joke out of the way, I wonder about your question about which new kinds of pictures the M8 will allow us to take. I don't know the answer in general of course, but for myself, I think that it will allow to take high-quality pictures in places where I often would either not have brought the camera due to sheer bulk (my 5D, for example), or couldn't have gotten that quality (my M6, for example). What those pictures might be of I am not sure yet, but I have a feeling that this means primarily shots of people, but maybe also shots in physically demanding locations, where a larger camera could not go.  I don't think that the M8 is a revolution in the same way that the early Leicas were. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your Old Dog Posted January 9, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted January 9, 2007 I don't think that the M8 is a revolution in the same way that the early Leicas were. Â While that's true, I think you'll agree, it might be revolutinary to Gary !! LOL The differance between SLR and Rangefinder is significant. The bigger camera and 'much' bigger lenses on SLR's draw a lot of attention that you won't find on a rangefinder. I bought a Nikon D200 because it was the smaller of my choices. There is one other significant area to consider. Â When viewing your image deposited on a ground glass with aperture wide open, damn near everything you point your camera at looks good and "selective" due to the point of focus and diffused backgrounds. With rangefinder you will find it necessary to locate the shot more with your eye/mind than with the cameras ground glass that you might be used to. You may find shooting with a rangefinder a little harder until you catch onto that differance. Face it, the art, if it's there should be there with or without the ground glass if it's there at all. Â My *** over-simplification *** of the matter is that you will find your mind creating the art and the rangefinder simply interupp\ting your line of sight while it records the image. If you are like most, it will make you feel more intune with your surroundings instead of following a big heavy SLR around town and snapping away. Â That's just my opinion and not speaking for anyone else. Â BTW - for what it's worth - I am a news photographer. I can tell you that it helps to be in the right place at the right time to get good images. Also, don't confuse "good image" with "good subject". I see a lot of bad images of "good subject" matter !! Not to belittle the guys work but the case you site of the Hindenburg is a case in point. Not all of those images were good. Yes the subject matter was extremely interesting but some bad images were made of the tragedy and given good credit due to the subject matter. Same with picture of beautiful girl, while she may beautiful the image may be less than stellar! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted January 9, 2007 Share #4 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Ray, which images are you talking about? I am missing some context... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jelderfield Posted January 9, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Here's what I hope the M8 will allow me to do - when I get one (I'm hoping for one this summer). I'm currently shooting the M7 a lot - a few rolls of color slide a day in New York. Â And maybe this is more about using a digital camera than not: Â I love my M7 - small with the 35 f2 lens, easy to carry around. Usually I shoot a scene, making a bunch of pictures, thinking what it will look like in the final scene. But I often feel sort of restricted - if I want to try a new technique - say a long shutter with blur - people walking in the frame. I will shoot a lot - but never feel certain that I am getting a good or interesting picture. Â Sure, if I'm shooting a portrait of a landscape - I know what I will get. But I've been shooting a lot of color in the street and trying to push my work to do new things. Get out of taking the same type of pictures each time out. Â With digital and the M8 - I will have the same discreet package, the same style and way of shooting but I will have the instant feed back to experiment with new angles, ideas, speeds, depths of field, etc, and have the instant feedback of the digital. Â I was shooting around wall street in the rain yesterday morning and it was very dark - I tried to make some pictures at f2 around 1/8 sec - but I was very uncertain whether they were working - I''ll see my slides tomorrow. I think that the film camera can make you try a lot of new things, to experiment BECAUSE of the uncertainty of the final image - but recently I have felt that the uncertainty of not knowing the outcome of final image to be a drawback. Â I'm hoping that the M8 will allow me greater freedom to work with different kinds of light and to play more than I would with slide film in color. To experiment and see if I'm getting good results while I still out shooting. Â Jonathan Elderfield Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted January 9, 2007 Share #6  Posted January 9, 2007 We’ve now seen fine photos and read descriptions from our Forum colleagues who are making good use of their M8s. Based on that it appears as though the M8 is a logical evolution of the M series, and therefore not really revolutionary as were the original Leicas. As an evolutionary product its technology extends what the M series can do. However, I suspect that the VAST majority of any revolution in photo images created in the M8 will be due to the vision of the photographers and not to the tool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elansprint72 Posted January 9, 2007 Share #7 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The award winning picture that year was by Charles Hoff titled "The Hindenburg Explosion", a picture we are all familar with....my research was not able to determine whether or not he used a Leica! Â I think the series of shots we most often think of wrt to this disaster were taken by Samuel Shere using a 5x4 Speed Graphic. He managed to get at least four shots, which is quite an achievement. Of course he had the advantage of not being right underneath the thing as it fell, or the quality might not have been quite so good. Â I can't see that the M8 is going to cause a revolution in the way that folks take photographs, aside from not having to change films every few minutes I can't see that operationally it is different from any other of the M's or even the III series (though they were smaller and perhaps slightly less obtrusive). Â Cheers, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter41951 Posted January 9, 2007 Share #8  Posted January 9, 2007 Some info here:  Tribute to Charles Hoff  http://www2.dailynewspix.com/index.asp?srch_e=&srchstr_e=hindenburg&srchstr_et=  DailyNews site has photos of "Big Bertha" his 1000mm lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnastovall Posted January 9, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Murray Becker took the Hindenburg photos with a Speed Graphic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your Old Dog Posted January 9, 2007 Share #10 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Ray, which images are you talking about? I am missing some context... Â Hi Carsten, I'm talking about maybe 40 percent of the ones shown in the website that Peter4195 pointed out. They are not all stellar photographic images although the event was without question, a stellar news story. I'm simply trying to imply that while an event may be spetacular, is no assurance that those who are there will get spetacular results. Â The Hindenburg shots by Huff are extrodinary in that there was not "auto" anything when he took these images. I've shot many fires myself at work and can tell you, on a subject as bright a helium fire you would have a hard time setting exposure. My favorite of all the shots was number 42 as listed on that web site. Â Carsten, for the record, I was in no way criticizing or disagreeing with what you said, just working off of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbindman Posted January 9, 2007 Author Share #11 Â Posted January 9, 2007 I don't think that the M8 is a revolution in the same way that the early Leicas were. Â I appreciate everyone's thoughtful replies. Taking a break from splitting the atom (or M8) can make for some interesting reading. Â My thought is that the M8 will be a revolution.... just in the way the early Leicas were. Apologies to Carsten. In fact I think it already is doing it and will continue to do so. That is to have a tool for any photographer who can get their hands on one, to keep up with the world as we find it in 2007, just as it did 70 years ago. Â We are moving faster, events are happening faster, even the planet seems to be rotating faster than it used to. I know it might seem that digital vs film is the core technology to keep pace with these changes, and it is partially true. But it is only Leica that transforms the photographer (it seems to me at least) to 'see' the world in such a new and different and beautiful way while offering him/her the speed and flexibility to catch the magic moment. Â I guess what I am saying is that the revolution might be from people just like me who are dreaming of what shots they will take with their new M8! Â Gary Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevez4 Posted January 9, 2007 Share #12 Â Posted January 9, 2007 One thing that is clear throughout the forum is that News Photogs must have a camera that is reliable and reasonably robust. The magenta cast problem and absolute lens sharpness and similar more a concern of vanity photogs. When one of my M-8 died on assignment that was critical. I could not ask the assembled crowd to return for a second sitting. It may be elitist but the M series was originally designed for photojournalists, documentary and news photographers. I hope that concern has not been lost in the mix. I fear it has been. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elansprint72 Posted January 9, 2007 Share #13 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Murray Becker took the Hindenburg photos with a Speed Graphic. Â Not the one in my 1944 Graphic Graflex Photography book! Â Guess there were a whole bunch of snappers there. Â Cheers, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted January 9, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted January 9, 2007 Carsten, for the record, I was in no way criticizing or disagreeing with what you said, just working off of it. Â Haha, today is a funny day. Everyone is apologising to me I was not upset, and didn't read it that way. I was just curious about the images you were talking about, and don't know that photographer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.