Lens use observation

[Guest joewehry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It would be stupid to say how a photographer "should" use their Leica lenses. But I noticed something interesting in the recent Leica brochure featuring Alex Majoli's images. Of the images presented in the brochure--which I am going to assume were the ones Leica felt featured the camera and lens to best advantage--over 80% were shot at apertures of 2.5 and above, with over half of those at f/8 and above. (The closest numerical average being around 5.6). Even the gorgeous images taken with the Nocti- and Summilux images were rarely shot wide open. Further, despite popular talk of shooting at speeds of 1/8 second, the majority of Mr. Majoli's images were shot at 1/125 and above.

 

It would be unfair to draw any conclusions as the averages are taken from a small sample, and does not take into account Mr. Majoli's shooting style, lighting conditions and subject matter. But it does make me consider how a working photographer of Alex Majoli's caliber used his camera in this situation. The images dispel the myth that to be a Leica photographer, one can only shoot wide open, at 1/8 of a second in order to realize the excellence of Leica's products and one's creative vision. At least in this case, an average of around f/5.6 and 1/125 ruled the day.

 

Also, as an aside, given the "lens shortage", the above information supports considering the Summarit range for your working lens.

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

[...] The images dispel the myth that to be a Leica photographer, one can only shoot wide open, at 1/8 of a second in order to realize the excellence of Leica's products and one's creative vision.

 

I never read or heard such a thing. One's creative vision requires a range of DOF and shutter speeds. Photographer's choice.

 

Before the M9, I never thought I'd appreciate 1/4000 th of a second at median f/stops.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/members/23965-albums4157-picture6780.jpg

[Guest joewehry]

My point exactly. The creative use of DOF and shutter speeds. Perhaps 'myth' is the wrong word. My post is to notice examples in comparison to mindlessly only shooting wide open (otherwise why invest in Summilux or Noctilux?) when a photographer such as Majoli is comfortable and effective using those stellar lenses at medium and high apertures.

 

With regards to shutter speeds, images shot at 1/8 second are often touted as an achievement (it can be, and is also second to choosing that shutter speed because it is a creative decision) and Leica literature repeats that the M series can be used effectively at shutter speeds as low as 1/8 second. (which they can). However the M series brochure shows wonderful images shot more frequently at 1/125 - 1/250. (And Erwin Puts' look into vibration reduction techniques suggest to exploit Leica's quality, one needs to be shooting around 1/250 and higher or use a tripod.)

 

We are on the same page. The fact that one can shoot wide open at 1/8 does not mean that it is the only or ideal way. That is the myth. Compelling images can also be created at f/16 and 1/1000. (Or 1/4000 as you demonstrate.)

[andybarton]

As someone said recently, if Leica thought the "Leica way" were wide open all the time, they'd sell their lenses with no aperture ring.

 

Did all the Leica heroes of the past shoot only wide open? I don't think so.

[lct]

Sure but we can shoot sharp images at fast apertures with a Leica and there are not many cameras like that.

[stuny]

I suspect that part of this "myth" arrises from Nocti users pushing the wide open aperture envelope, even when it may not make sense to do so -- The Nocti owner has spent a significant amount on an unusual, fine lens and many such owners want to make use of its most unusual features.

[bybrett]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe he doesn't have a set of ND filters, Venice can be quite bright...

[pico]

My point exactly. The creative use of DOF and shutter speeds. Perhaps 'myth' is the wrong word. My post is to notice examples in comparison to mindlessly only shooting wide open (otherwise why invest in Summilux or Noctilux?) when a photographer such as Majoli is comfortable and effective using those stellar lenses at medium and high apertures.

 

I can certainly appreciate tests of lenses shot wide open, especially the Summilux or Noctilux because some of us use these lenses wide-open by necessity.

 

With regards to shutter speeds, images shot at 1/8 second are often touted as an achievement (it can be, and is also second to choosing that shutter speed because it is a creative decision) and Leica literature repeats that the M series can be used effectively at shutter speeds as low as 1/8 second. (which they can).

 

A technical point if I may. If an exposure is long enough the subtle vibration of opening then closing the shutter is the very least (or no) contribution to the full exposure therefore it might be more appropriate to specify, for example, that shutter shake is significant from 1/4 to 2 second - on a tripod of course.

 

We are on the same page. The fact that one can shoot wide open at 1/8 does not mean that it is the only or ideal way. That is the myth. Compelling images can also be created at f/16 and 1/1000. (Or 1/4000 as you demonstrate.)

 

Thank you. I am clear about what you wrote now.

[250swb]

The images dispel the myth that to be a Leica photographer, one can only shoot wide open, at 1/8 of a second in order to realize the excellence of Leica's products and one's creative vision. At least in this case, an average of around f/5.6 and 1/125 ruled the day.

.

 

Well it is a myth, and always has been. Leica developed fast lenses to fulfill a need for fast lenses, not an aesthetic consideration.

 

But many amateur photographs buy into the myth, and never having needed to present a reportage story, or a sharp image for a front page, they really do believe wide open is how Leica lenses are primarily meant to be used. They can afford their focusing errors because nothing of importance rests on it.

 

If we take the Leica M to be primarily a documentary camera, whether street, war, or press, no photographer I can think of has ever had a style based solely around shooting a lens wide open if the light is good enough to stop it down.

 

Steve

[pico]

If we take the Leica M to be primarily a documentary camera, whether street, war, or press, no photographer I can think of has ever had a style based solely around shooting a lens wide open if the light is good enough to stop it down.

 

Neither have I known a photographer of those types you mention who shot exclusively wide open for 'the look', however we know that, time permitting, often shooting wide in good light can help isolate a subject, and also control harsh contrast of the subject. I used the later a lot with lenses that were long enough, such as 50mm or greater. Of course I do not know at all how an ASPH lens behaves regarding lowering contrast wider open, so I'm speaking of earlier lenses.

 

In fact, I've never handled a Leica ASPH lens. Someday perhaps. I'm open to correction.

[adan]

This whole thing seems a "straw-man" argument to me - as pico implied in post #2.

 

Can you show me any place where anyone actually said or implied "that to be a Leica photographer, one can only shoot wide open, at 1/8 of a second..."?

 

The "myth" is that there is such a myth. You are arguing against something that doesn't exist in the first place.

 

That being said - there are situations where I have trouble getting the pictures I want even with f/1.4 and ISO 2500. So I can't afford f/2.5 as a limited factor - not even f/2. There are equally situations (non-action) where being able to hand-hold at 1/8th means avoiding ISO 2500 (and getting better image quality).

 

It is definitely NOT a myth that a camera limited to f/2.5 and a hand-holdable 1/60th second is going to prevent photographers from capturing a lot of the world in natural light.

[lct]

+1

[250swb]

Can you show me any place where anyone actually said or implied "that to be a Leica photographer, one can only shoot wide open, at 1/8 of a second..."?

 

.

 

Hmmm, I can't show you an original source, nor am I going to trawl LUF to find a recently used example of the myth. But the idea that if somebody has bought a lens of, say, f1.4 it needs to be used at f1.4 to get the most out of it (I always think in an ironic way they mean 'getting their monies worth') often comes up in LUF discussions.

 

Try Noctilux threads for prime examples of the myth, or even interject and ask what the lens is like at f5.6,..... because nobody will know. The lens has been purchased for f0.95 alone, and while f0.95 has produced some vaguely interesting images, very pleasing to some, they are almost universally vacuous photo's of a blade of grass or something equally banal. This is what happens when an aesthetic ideal is dominant over content. But its easy to do, open the lens wide, tell everybody its the best lens in the world, photograph any old crap, and even your Aunty Vera will go ohh and ahhh!

 

So try looking harder, see how many posts in a 50mm Summilux thread talk about resolution at f5.6 compared to the times people talk about the resolution and rendering at f1.4. They don't all mean they need an f1.4 lens because its dark, they mean they need it because they found an easy way to make a photo look acceptabe amongst their peers. It doesn't matter if the myth that Leica lenses were primarily made to be used wide open started at a specific moment in time. But its being reinforced every time a Noctilux or Summilux discussion comes up on LUF, and that should worry everybody or 'Leica photography' will eventually become a joke

 

Steve

[lct]

All Leica lenses are more or less the same at f/5.6. Most photogs need fast lenses for low light and shallow DoF whilst others give their money to Leica for other purposes. So much the better. Pleasure is not forbidden fortunately.

[NZDavid]

Lens speed to me is analogous to available power in a car: You may not use it all the time but it's nice to know it's there if you need it.

 

Günter Osterloh: "All Leica lenses already perform at a very high degree of correction at full aperture. This means that, with Leica lenses, the full aperture is already a perfectly usable working aperture and not just a "prestige aperture."

[pgk]

I think that the myth has changed. It seems to me that in the past (in film days) a fast lens was often essential to capture a low light shot as film speed was fixed, and thus having a lens capable of shooting useful in lower light became a prerequisite for some (pro) photographers and thus a myth - albeit a somewhat vague and hard to pin down one - came into some sort of existence.

 

Today, it actually seems to me that the myth has changed and that there are a number of people who now equate 'more expensive' Leica lens with 'better' Leica lens, and have lost sight of the fact that a faster lens opens up different possibilities, rather than increased image quality throughout its aperture range. Just my impression from quite a number of posts that I read here.

[NZDavid]

Some lenses from other manufacturers -- and some older Leica lenses, first version 35 Summilux, for example -- are notably worse wide open. Producing top quality images at full aperture is the preserve of only the very finest optics.

 

When I visited Solms I heard that the (at that time new) Summarits were slightly slower because photographers did not always need faster lenses. Why? Faster film or sensors.

The excellent optical performance of these more affordable (by Leica's Olympian standards) lenses would suffice. 2.5 is hardly really slow anyway.

 

Leica subsequently decided to pull out all the stops so to speak and produce the ultimate super fast and super expensive new Summiluxes and Noctilux.

 

The other characteristic that makes fast lenses special of course is not just low light performance but shallow DOF. Again, nice to have when you need it. I don't have anything faster than f/2, btw.

[thighslapper]

As Puts says somewhere in his vast tome ..... current production lenses in real world use exceed the resolution of the recording medium and are effectively 'perfect' for all but the most specialised photography.

 

Pixel peeping has resulted in delusional discussions about minutiae in performance differences that are irrelevant to the production of decent images for 99% of users. Entertaining it may be, but from a practical point of view it is irrelevant.

 

Leica does give you the advantage of low shutter speeds and excellent quality wide open, but I don't see it as a reason to use these features unless you have to......

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear