diogenis Posted June 15, 2011 Share #341 Posted June 15, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) "This guy" happens to be Muhammed Ali training for a fight. It has to be one of the best and most famous portraits of Ali and rivals the famous overhead shot of Ali (Cassius Clay at the time) beating Liston. Not all great sport shots are produced during a game, and the post by Andy said that none of these shooters were creative. This shot of Ali in the pool is the essence of being creative and also capturing something special about the person. You probably do not even know that Ali trained underwater to improve his strength and speed. Here are two of Leifer's iconic shots. (You'll see that some of the other photographers are using Leicas.) I think he was the first person to mount a remote camera over a boxing ring. Is that being creative? Alan, these shots can easily be taken with an M. In fact. This is not what I meant about fast action though. Can you please move a bit past Ali and show us some "creative examples" of a F1 car? Not the pondium shots with the champagne, the cars... or some creative shots of a paparazzo trying to show the crotch of of a celeb? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 15, 2011 Posted June 15, 2011 Hi diogenis, Take a look here Open Letter to Leica — 10 Ways To Improve the M9 Rangefinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
diogenis Posted June 15, 2011 Share #342 Posted June 15, 2011 Alan, I'm really not disagreeing with most of what you write. I just am not sure that Leica should chase the technology with the M in the direction that the DSLR makers do. I don't think they have to do this to stay alive. They just have to make their product, what they have now, technologically advanced. It's strength is in what it doesn't do. And, I agree that I'm not good enough to knock the SI photographers, either. They are great at what they do. Same with wedding photographers. They deliver. I'm glad i don't have to do that. But, I do understand that a lot of what they do is the equipment. I also know that, like the wedding photographers, they can also be amazingly creative at what they do. They are pro's and I'm sure that most all of them can do both; deliver and be creative. You just happened to pick probably the most uncreative example . Alan doesn't want to realise that. And Leica also don't want to put everything in it's M line to compete dSLRs. They are happy that their camera deliver stunning results in the most compact and lightweight form and their customers are also happy with the journey as well. An improved RF could eventually solve the problems that come with the mechanical one that needs frequent calibration and adjustment or requires good eyesight from the user Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 15, 2011 Share #343 Posted June 15, 2011 I have no idea why anyone brought up creativity in the first place other than as a distraction. Exactly. And as much as I value creativity, it isn't the sole measure of photography. Nor is it confined to users of certain cameras. Aren't things getting a bit backwards when defending the status quo of a camera maker depends on putting down an entire genre of photography? I've been photographing my kids' sports and the challenges of photographing even their games has increased my respect for sports photographers generally, and especially for those who find ways to be creative in that field. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 15, 2011 Share #344 Posted June 15, 2011 Alan, these shots can easily be taken with an M. In fact. This is not what I meant about fast action though. Can you please move a bit past Ali and show us some "creative examples" of a F1 car? Not the pondium shots with the champagne, the cars...or some creative shots of a paparazzo trying to show the crotch of of a celeb? I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm the one who said these kinds of shot could be done with an M but Leicas are simply no longer much of a player in the field of sports - creative photos or not. The price alone limits many of these photographers from being able to justify adding a "second" system today. They used to make cameras and lenses that were used at F1 races too, but their gear rarely is used there today. (Maybe some discontinued cameras and lenses and some Ms used for general shots.) If they are going to broaden applications for their gear, I am not saying they need to do it only via an M camera. As I said at the top, I may be misreading your point but If this has to do with a view that people who use Leicas are somehow more creative than people who use other kinds of cameras you are totally delusional. Are the only appropriate uses for a Leica those that you approve of and which you put it to? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 15, 2011 Share #345 Posted June 15, 2011 Z, which camera are you using to take your kid's sport shots? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted June 15, 2011 Share #346 Posted June 15, 2011 ....This shot of Ali in the pool is the essence of being creative and also capturing something special about the person. You probably do not even know that Ali trained underwater to improve his strength and speed..... In fact I did knew that he was training underwater, but actually I didn't care then and I don't care now either. Also I don't like boxing as a sport -at all- and don't like Ali in the first shot as he shows us some kind of hate over the other guy on the floor. I fail to see anything good when someone tries to knock someone else on the ground and also most times injure him. It somehow gives me the wong messages so, please enough of Ali. Actually one more thing: please tell me here, why the first photo with Ali is creative? Not the second which is indeed creative but the first one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 15, 2011 Share #347 Posted June 15, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) When using copyrighted images, please provide links instead of posting them. Now I am obliged to remove them and that makes the discussion hard to follow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 15, 2011 Share #348 Posted June 15, 2011 Alan, these shots can easily be taken with an M. In fact. This is not what I meant about fast action though. Can you please move a bit past Ali and show us some "creative examples" of a F1 car? Not the pondium shots with the champagne, the cars... I'm not sure why creativity is even part of this discussion, or why any action is ruled out from the realm of creative photography. Not F1 cars, but creative photography of car racing: 2nd prize stories - World Press Photo And a link I posted above was about bicycle racing: 3rd prize stories - World Press Photo Some of the Laforet and Burnett photos are of action too, and yet they represent a creative approach, not standard stuff for the back page of the newspaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 15, 2011 Share #349 Posted June 15, 2011 Jaapv, I'm not sure you made it any harder to follow than it already was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted June 15, 2011 Share #350 Posted June 15, 2011 one group just doesn't understand that the other group is right. No! No! No! - It's exactly the other way 'round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted June 15, 2011 Share #351 Posted June 15, 2011 I'm not sure why creativity is even part of this discussion, or why any action is ruled out from the realm of creative photography. Because it crept in somehow because Leica suggests that the way the M VF works allow for creativity I guess... nice shots there btw Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 15, 2011 Share #352 Posted June 15, 2011 Z, which camera are you using to take your kid's sport shots? I've used various cameras, but lately use Canon 7D with 135 or 24-105 and M9 with 35 or 50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted June 15, 2011 Share #353 Posted June 15, 2011 Winogrand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted June 15, 2011 Share #354 Posted June 15, 2011 The point is, John, it isn't all about the end result for many of us. It is as much about the journey. I can imagine nothing worse than living in an anodyne, hyper-efficient world in which everything is so damn perfect that it has no meaning, no life, no character, no soul. Bill, I absolutely agree. Fortunately there's no danger of that world coming about - and the places that seem closest to it are a only a facade maintained at considerable human cost. As far as photography goes, a lot of it's about the journey for me too. Otherwise I'd never have owned a monorail camera and a black cloth, never have bought another Barnack camera after 20 years, and so on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted June 15, 2011 Share #355 Posted June 15, 2011 An improved RF could eventually solve the problems that come with the mechanical one that needs frequent calibration and adjustment or requires good eyesight from te user Hi Not had one recalibrated ever over decades, and any open loop system will be subject to errors after damage/misuse, but chimping in field for recal is to risible for words. An M is the last chance saloon for those with eyesight problems. The ZM is an alternate solution if you can put up with film and rest of the body. Trying to improve the optical scheme well optimistc. Try an X100... Use an auto focue DSLR if the M and ZM dont work for you. Leica have had a chequered history with changing the rangefinder, similer to the M8s IR filter... Would you trust them to better Barnacks scheme? Zeiss could not in the Contax G1 and G2, some people enthuse over the G series, 'no one' bought them Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted June 15, 2011 Share #356 Posted June 15, 2011 C'mon folks, you should all know there is a big difference between wire/agency spot shooters and those hired to shoot editorial or documentary work. Andy was somewhat right in saying there was no room for creativity in getting the Bruins goal, only that's what newspaper and wire service photographers do, not SI photographers who are typically out two to three months from publication so they have the leisure to build stories and do things differently. But wire photographers are only interested in that specific moment. Same with paparrazi - they are doing an entirely different job of shooting celebrities than say Platon or Seliger. And since there are many different working styles that is why there are many different camera types. And believe it or not, there are some still shooting film for clients (though rarer and rarer). And there are war photographers doing essays with iPhones and p&s. Sure there's room for improvement with the M line - I think we can all agree with that. But to try and shoehorn the best aspects of a rangefinder, a dslr, a m4/3 and a medium format all into one is ridiculous. Being an M, yet with digital capture, is what makes it unique, no matter the price. If you don't get it, you don't get it. Move on. Plenty of great cameras out there, and I know of at least one very famous photog who has been shooting with a GF-1 (for Nat Geo at that). It's all about what works for YOU. Plenty of choices, both recent and legacy. And many more to come I'm sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen.one Posted June 15, 2011 Share #357 Posted June 15, 2011 well ive just readed through and must admit a few things mentioned are really hard to understand for me. Of course M lenses are really great, but dont understand why that man bought a M9 if he feels so uncorfortable with. we all probably would be happy with better capturing performace, but for me is more important to make the shutter quieter, i often works with it on some performances, where its pretty annoying and it erases the m9 invisibility effect but i agree with some better LCD, love to remove the usb side connector... anyway the live view function will probably finish my interest in any future M camera. I love my M9 for the best ,,analog'' feel from digital production. Ive taken out my fathers Pentax middleformat camera last week and take some diapositives and it really made me start thinking about return to using this technique again... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 15, 2011 Share #358 Posted June 15, 2011 Andy was somewhat right in saying there was no room for creativity in getting the Bruins goal, only that's what newspaper and wire service photographers do, not SI photographers who are typically out two to three months from publication so they have the leisure to build stories and do things differently. Thanks. I'm glad you understood what I was trying to say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted June 16, 2011 Share #359 Posted June 16, 2011 Fact: The Leica M will change. Prediction: Ensuing reactions can be read in the fairy tale "Goldilock and the three bears". However, very few will clap their hands and exclaim "Just right!" and eat it all up ... because it will not be enough for some, and too much for the rest. Fact #2: The next Leica M will be expensive. Prediction: Immediate comparisons will be made to cameras costing 25% the price while offering 200% more of whatever the next M has, or doesn't have. Some self-proclaimed internet guru with an eager following of devotees will write an open letter to Leica taking them to task for 10 things they should have done ... and a debate will ensue on the LUF that strains the servers. Fact #3: The expensive new M will sell just fine. Prediction: Some Luddites will grumble and buy, and some of the techno-addicted will moan and buy. Leica's user base will grow, but will pale in comparison to the latest gadget packed prosumer/pro DSLRs and hybrid cameras. Fact: The new Leica M will be appropriate for some professional use. Prediction: Enthusiasts will buy because of this associative attribute. Most current M rangefinder users that make money from their camera will wait until the enthusiasts become bored or disenchanted and sell their new M. Personal observation: I make money with my Ms. The thought of replacing my two M9s to the tune of $16,000., less whatever the M9 will fetch then, is unlikely unless the photographic industry does a 180. Like many Pros I know, get what works for you and stick with it while skipping a generation or two of "upgrades." This philosophy has nothing to do with being a supporter or detractor of technological advancements ... it has to do with money and business ... as in: "staying in business." -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted June 16, 2011 Share #360 Posted June 16, 2011 Fact: The Leica M will change. Prediction: Ensuing reactions can be read in the fairy tale "Goldilock and the three bears". However, very few will clap their hands and exclaim "Just right!" and eat it all up ... because it will not be enough for some, and too much for the rest. Indisputably, but some are still using Barnacks and MPs, Leica need to max out their production capability to make more profit. Or their management will suffer, like your last para. They dont need another M5. Fact #2: The next Leica M will be expensive. Prediction: Immediate comparisons will be made to cameras costing 25% the price while offering 200% more of whatever the next M has, or doesn't have. Some self-proclaimed internet guru with an eager following of devotees will write an open letter to Leica taking them to task for 10 things they should have done ... and a debate will ensue on the LUF that strains the servers. the servers can take it, the M2 was cheaper, and sold real well, optimistic to think that Leica will repeat M2, M5 more likely. Fact #3: The expensive new M will sell just fine. Prediction: Some Luddites will grumble and buy, and some of the techno-addicted will moan and buy. Leica's user base will grow, but will pale in comparison to the latest gadget packed prosumer/pro DSLRs and hybrid cameras. optimistic, the M9 had a unique marketing feature it was a digtal 'real leica' i.e. full frame, like back in 1920s. The M10 needs to sell like M9, not like M5. Fact: The new Leica M will be appropriate for some professional use. Prediction: Enthusiasts will buy because of this associative attribute. Most current M rangefinder users that make money from their camera will wait until the enthusiasts become bored or disenchanted and sell their new M. Few of my enth/semi profriends have bought a M9, many have stayed with their RD/1 or upgraded their M8 to a film M. If you look at the 2nd hand on able prices for M8 and RD/1 then they are more convergent than they 'should be', e.g. on pixel basis, rather then skipping (see yours below) people seem to be hesitating,... The dentists have gone mad, my even more affluent friends, empty my gbag and say but all these are film cameras. Personal observation: I make money with my Ms. The thought of replacing my two M9s to the tune of $16,000., less whatever the M9 will fetch then, is unlikely unless the photographic industry does a 180. Like many Pros I know, get what works for you and stick with it while skipping a generation or two of "upgrades." This philosophy has nothing to do with being a supporter or detractor of technological advancements ... it has to do with money and business ... as in: "staying in business." -Marc Understand all that, tax writing of capital etc. But you have ignored that many people are using CV lenses, some cause they were not patient enough, others cause they looked at the photos and bought the most cost effective, or ergonomic for them. Cosina could bring out a follow on to the RD/1 they can manufacture the same product more cheaply than Leica, they wont do this unless they see a market volume (and % penetration) sufficient for the investement. They thought the f/1.1 5cm was going to be profitable, stopped the f/1.5 5cm. Leica have stopped the R series similarly. You dont have CV or ZM lenses? It is a horse race the starting gates have opened who will be a runner, is the 1st question? You seem to have ignored that, The Nikon F, buried the Contarex in '59. In 58 I was going to buy a Contarex, one look at the Nikon PR liturate in '59 was enough. Ive looked at RD/1 rescently still hesitating, thought about a M9 last year, reverted to thinkng about RD/1 this year. I'm not as as sanguine as you Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.