Jump to content

Crisis: P&S takes better pictures than my Leicas


alw

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently bought a cheapish Olympus XZ-1 point & shoot-compact and I´ve been in love with it ever since. The reason is simply that I get much better pictures, visually, out of it than I´d get with my M-Leicas when shooting street. The reaction speed is so much faster the instant I see something interesting focusing/metering-wise.

 

Aaargh, I´m in crisis! Convince me that Leica & film are still the way to go! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know...still, I´d so much like to shoot only with Leica, it´s the aura thing with it.

 

And yes, I´m too much gear-orientated. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange - my wife’s XZ1 takes good photographs, but not even close to the M9. And they fall apart in post-processing, especially “ difficult” shots, like underwater ones.

Tells something about film, I guess :D<ducks and hides>

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange - my wife’s XZ1 takes good photographs, but not even close to the M9. And they fall apart in post-processing, especially “ difficult” shots, like underwater ones.

 

Yes, I did not mean that they are technically better but visually I get better content. And converting to b/w helps a lot. I even like the coarse grain I get with higher ISOs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Aaargh, I´m in crisis! Convince me that Leica & film are still the way to go! :)

 

Yeah, I know...still, I´d so much like to shoot only with Leica, it´s the aura thing with it.

 

And yes, I´m too much gear-orientated. :D

 

On the latter point - in fairness, how a tool feels and how you interact with it as a result are (imho) important aspects of the creative process. But they're in no way (to me) decisive. However, I wouldn't agree that one should ever use a Leica camera due to some "aura". That's just, to use legal language, irrelevant.

 

On the former point - and to paraphrase Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes, if you don't know it by now, then you'll never never never know it.

 

Film for me is wonderful and I consistently get better results (read: results that I prefer, because, after all, that's what it is about as an amateur) using it rather than digital.

 

Edit/Ps. I should say though that I also considered the XZ-1 due to the 1.8 lens which I found fascinating. I'm happy I got the D2 instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Content is king. If you get great pictures with any camera it shouldn't make you feel bad that you are not making use of another piece of kit. Some of the most impressive street shots I've seen recently are with the iPhone!

 

LouisB

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like my wife's Olympus 1050 SW (= shock & waterproof). It's very small and better protected against rain and snow than any M ever could be. But at least on a 27"screen you'll see the difference. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Content is king. If you get great pictures with any camera it shouldn't make you feel bad that you are not making use of another piece of kit. Some of the most impressive street shots I've seen recently are with the iPhone!

 

LouisB

 

Oh boy, let´s not mention iPhone here - I feel even more guilty shooting with that (and get great photos too)!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like my wife's Olympus 1050 SW (= shock & waterproof). It's very small and better protected against rain and snow than any M ever could be. But at least on a 27"screen you'll see the difference. ;)

 

Surely you can see the technical difference, but I still prefer an interesting composition, however muddy, to a boring one with perfect pixels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question not asked yet ... How long have you been shooting with the M?

 

Is it just that you're not used to the way it focuses/meters? Maybe practice more with the M so that it becomes second nature to you.

 

Personally, I've only used a friend's Leica M for a few days over a weekend and even though I instantly fell in love with it the photographs were cr@p, due to my not knowing the system and how it reacts. So when I do get my own M I will not expect the results I get from my dSLR for quite some time, weeks, months or even who knows years :eek:

 

As the old saying goes "practice makes perfect".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely you can see the technical difference, but I still prefer an interesting composition, however muddy, to a boring one with perfect pixels.

 

Yes, and that's the problem with those little p&s-cameras: No optical finder, only a small glare-type screen on the back. For better composition I prefer a real rangefinder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were talking about a Stradivarius violin or a Maserati car or ......... , would you expect to have mastered them like their cheap common alternatives that most people use/drive?

 

If all you need is 'scrapbook' pics or whatever, yes, your P&S is the ticket. But if you aspire to produce some occasional sensational images, from any POV, alongside you normal 'ordinary' pics, consider training hard to bring yourself up to the level that Leica can deliver. With time and practice, it can happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and that's the problem with those little p&s-cameras: No optical finder, only a small glare-type screen on the back. For better composition I prefer a real rangefinder.

 

To be honest, if I want perfect composition, I use an SLR. But a good composition isn´t always´"perfect" - p&s -type of shooting can bring you new, unconventional and interesting angles that you wouldn´t think of if given "too much" time to compose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If all you need is 'scrapbook' pics or whatever, yes, your P&S is the ticket. But if you aspire to produce some occasional sensational images, from any POV, alongside you normal 'ordinary' pics, consider training hard to bring yourself up to the level that Leica can deliver. With time and practice, it can happen.

 

Surely you´re not saying that only Leica can produce "sensational" images?

Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps what you are really reacting to is the technology of auto focus / metering in the olympus vs the very manual aspect of using a film leica. try an x1 against the olympus and then perhaps you would have a more relevant comparison. there is a reason all the bells and whistles have been added, people like to point and shoot and technology has brought that to a much higher level than kodak brownie days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your camera is very positively reviewed on dpreview. And with such a fast aperture zoom! I'm not surprised at the results you are getting.

 

What I think you're finding so rewarding is auto focus, auto metering, and zoom capability. If a camera does them well, they are hard to beat on the street. Even face recognition can be a great asset. No harm in letting automation do some of the work for you. Sounds like the camera is allowing you to focus more on seeing, which is what it's all about.

 

I recently sold my M9 and lenses and now shoot with a GF1/GX1 kit. For street work I find it more productive and downright fun to use.

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

It´s all about the reaction speed to capture instantly the moment you find worth shooting.

And the camera is totally silent too, which can be priceless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...