Leica's advantage?

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Option-5 and Option-6 if my memory does not fail me. (Or was it Option-Shift-5? You will find out)

 

Mike

 

Thanks. I was too lazy to search for the "proper" solution, there being obvious and was workarounds.

 

Square brackets are on all my Mac keyboards, on the same keys as the curly brackets.

 

{ }

[ ]

 

I would like to see a photo of that keyboard without square brackets. Thanks.

 

Mine does not have any curly ones, either.

 

There you are:

 

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!

 

 

On a PC, the proper combination would be altgr-ö and -ä, respective.

 

EDIT -

 

I found both the square and the curly ones. On the keyboard shown the correct keypresses are alt-5, 6 and alt-8, 9, respectively.

[Lightwrangler]

∞

§

Square brackets are on all my Mac keyboards, on the same keys as the curly brackets.

{ }

[ ]

 

Sorry, I completely forgot there are different keyboard-layouts around in this world.

Luckily pop's - obviously swiss? - keyboard seems to have the brackets in the same place as my german one.

 

Mike

[tomasis7]

I dont want create new thread and want to ask whats advantage of that watch for them who dont like watches, just despise them

 

Im going buy Breitling Navitimer with caliber 01 for 7k $ within a year or so after sold some old leica lenses.

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!

[tomasis7]

It is quite fine for me that some consider this below FAR SUPERIOR over anything else in the universum, so long we are happy with the choices.

 

Kasper, I think I know what watch I can recommend to you.

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!

[Paul J]

OK Kasper the friendly Troll. Here are some real world series for you Leica MF v Canon AF.

 

Leica Manual Follow Focus

 

Fast moving erratic child running at camera - check

Leica Summilux 35mm shot wide open at 1.4 - Check

Various Expressions - Check

Sharp? - Ridiculously sharp. You can crop it to a 90mm equivalent and it still looks native res. Try that with your Canon.

 

 

 

 

-

[Paul J]

Canon AF

 

Fast Moving child running at camera - Check!

Canon 24-70 "Predictive AF" shot at 2.8 - Check!

Various expressions? - I couldn't tell you.

Sharp? Even where it is sharp it looks soft and mushy

100% Missed opportunity.

 

1 Sharp - I don't like it. Doesn't capture what I wanted to say. Youget this alot with Auto everything cameras that do everything for you.

 

Misfocused on background

 

Sharp shot of back - useless shot to me.

 

He came back for a second run - When the AF finally did focus it focussed on the background.

 

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica Manual Follow Focus

 

Fast Moving subject - Check!

Noctilux shot at 0.95 follow focused and then recomposed - Check!

Sharp - Check!

 

I have about 6 in this series, all sharp as hell.

 

[Guest Kasper]

Canon AF

 

Fast Moving child running at camera - Check!

Canon 24-70 "Predictive AF" shot at 2.8 - Check!

Various expressions? - I couldn't tell you.

Sharp? Even where it is sharp it looks soft and mushy

 

 

Here you go again. Pay attention. The challenge still counts. Under the conditions as I described. (Can you read?) There's no way you or anyone else can win it. By the way,In the meantime I tried it out with that very experienced Leica user .Several times. So, take the challenge if you are so sure.

[Paul J]

Can you read?

 

I can read and I can also read between the lines. I can see right through you.

[Guest Kasper]

No guts? There’s a price you can win!! Right: two witnesses, one a professional photographer. The whole thing will be filmed, and put on facbook. Everyone than is able to see who is wright and who is wrong. Clear on this forum too.

Be a little carefull in using impolite words like troll. And try to learn how AF works, I should say.

 

Best regards, K.

[MarkP]

Paul,

 

he's clearly getting under your skin and you're getting nowhere with him

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!

...it's time we all use the 'ignoring skills' our kids learn in primary school;)

 

btw - great photos:)

 

Mark

[Guest Kasper]

Well, that is clear. You don’t dare to take the challenge. As expected, of course. It seems true what Tony Field wrote, as far as some of his words on Leica can be transferred to you as a Leica fan. You believe in Ghosts.!

For the rest of the readers: thank you for the explanations concerning the benefits of the M. I think I made it clear that I agree on it. Nevertheless I stick to my point of regretting the shortcomings. But as I said, the new M will be a blessing in that respect.

6400 ISO , 3fps ( if needed) and the rest is enough for me. Only when AF is absolutely needed (!) I’ll take the C. Perhaps in the futere that won’t be necessary either.

 

Best regards, Kasper.

[Peter H]

I dont want create new thread and want to ask whats advantage of that watch for them who dont like watches, just despise them

 

Im going buy Breitling Navitimer with caliber 01 for 7k $ within a year or so after sold some old leica lenses.

 

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating:

 

The analogy between watches and Leicas is very weak.

 

Other than perhaps durability, the only thing that distinguishes a Breitling, for example, from a $10 plastic watch is that it may look nicer in your eyes, will cost hundreds of times more, and will probably be less useful as a watch.

 

A Leica M, on the other hand, when compared with a modern DSLR, has very many functional differences. They may not all suit you, but they are there.

 

The expensive watch is jewellery, like it or not, whereas the Leica is an instrument very well suited for certain purposes that make it quite different from a DSLR.

[Lindolfi]

Peter H, I don't quite agree that expensive watches are just jewellery. And there are analogies with a Leica M, at least there used to be. A good mechanical watch is expensive, because it is hard to make. It has an advantage over a digital watch in the sense that it will not suddenly stop running because the battery runs out. As long as you wind it up, it will keep time for you. The same with the old Leica M's. No battery dependence and a precise mechanism.

 

When I still worked in the Leiden astronomical observatory, there was a huge clock that was housed in a temperature and air pressure regulated glass cabin. It had an accuracy of about 9 seconds per month. When digital watches came out, some of them were better than that. Yet I liked that clock for the knowledge that was needed to build it and make it run that way.

 

In a world where play in plastic lenses has become unimportant because electronically controlled feedback systems simpy pull the play out of it if so required with autofocus, it has become harder for me to become fond of products. Leica makes an exception here and so do some mechanical watches for me, even though I don't need jewellery.

[pico]

Peter H, I don't quite agree that expensive watches are just jewellery.[...]

 

I once had an expensive designer watch but found that I did not have a better time than before, but I did learn that time was money: my watch cost $6K US and my old one cost $2K US and, naturally, it ran slow.

 

When I retired my employer gifted me with a solar powered gold watch. My night life went to hell.

 

Seriously, at the university I noted that as cell phones became more common, fewer students wore watches and today almost none do.

 

There is a clock in the Leica and it is cumbersome to read, so given how expensive the camera is we can say that it is indeed a prestige timekeeper.

[tomasis7]

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating:

 

The analogy between watches and Leicas is very weak.

 

Other than perhaps durability, the only thing that distinguishes a Breitling, for example, from a $10 plastic watch is that it may look nicer in your eyes, will cost hundreds of times more, and will probably be less useful as a watch.

 

A Leica M, on the other hand, when compared with a modern DSLR, has very many functional differences. They may not all suit you, but they are there.

 

The expensive watch is jewellery, like it or not, whereas the Leica is an instrument very well suited for certain purposes that make it quite different from a DSLR.

 

I dont agree but I would understand why you did think so. I dont expect everybody know A lot about watches that 7k price doesnt raise eyebrows. It is the same way Kasper reason about rangefinders. It made me smile that poor Kasper thinks that the new M will give better photos for him compared to older models. It shows how one perceives company philosophy , brand & products at own his way. Alang G post illustrates perfectly how we perceive products.

 

I dont want babble much about Breitling, but Leica and Breitling have a lot common than you think. Breitling watch was created as precision instrument and used in War I pilots to calculate fuel in the airplane. Breitling Navitimer looks about same in year 1956 as now. Hence M3 and M9P. Manufacturing tolerance is tighest available, they dont outsource, they use own expensive CNC machines. One german newspapper tested automatic mechanical movements and Breitling came out as most accurate, it even beats Rollex. It goes on and on.

 

It is interesting how everybody perceive products as luxury and non luxury. For me Navitimer is simply a tool for every day. I will worn out this, I will use this when I paint oil, repair car, wash food, everything else. But M3 and Navitimer will outlast me and my intention is to have 100% pure mechanical high advanced stuffs with "form follows function" as nice bonus. I guess Im very into design, architecture so there is no way to turn around when I want simple workable tools.

 

I admired motor journalist. He simply had nothing except outworn jacket and he drove around on old his Bentley. He had passion for motoring. I think we live once and our lives are very short so do whatever hll it pleases you.

 

Luxury is subjective, For me Luxury is gold, diamonds, patina that is superflous. If other perceive High tech technology manufactured as luxury items. It is fine in that way. My interest for tech is a curse

[Peter H]

Tomasis, I don't question your right to enjoy your watch. and no one can tell you that your choice is wrong.

 

But the genuine pleasure you get from the quality of workmanship and materials and, in your eyes, design, are not fully reflected in their function, which could barely be simpler: tell the time with reasonable accuracy and don't break too easily. Many a cheaper watch can achieve these things with elegance as well as economy. This question of economy is important in design, or should be.

 

I understand the distinction you make between superfluous bling and admirable quality. But to my mind economy in design is a very high virtue too: form that follows function at the minimum cost necessary to achieve its purpose (including longevity) is the highest design ideal.

 

I believe the perfect watches inhabit a region somewhere down in the $100 area, whereas to achieve a similar marriage of quality and performance in a contemporary camera, you must go way up the ladder toward Leica; perhaps all the way, depending on your photographic requirements.

[tomasis7]

Peter H, I dont think that you understand how it is hard to make mechanical automatic movement. Cheapest is 7750 Valjoux that residues about at 1000 price level if one doesnt want wind up or quartz.

 

Your comparison is unfair that it is ok to treat watch at required price level because it satisfies your needs while Leica never synonimous with "economy" releases APO 50mm for 7k while Canikon costs 200 dollars. So according to your philosphy, perfect lens is Canikon 1.8 or X100.

 

Lomo, Rollei 35S are perfect also because it gives picture. My Samsung Galaxy II is perfect because I can take 28mm wide angle pictures.

 

What I want to say, that we get what we pay for. I think we would agree to that. Also we have different priorities for different things. For example I think owning 8 different Leica lenses is superflous as some of us do own. I plan to sell off all lenses until I have only two left. I could call it as my minimalistic way to take photos with best tool available.

 

Just now Im wearing knockoff Tissot 80$. Seller of HongKong convinced me that it was genuine

[Peter H]

Peter H, I dont think that you understand how it is hard to make mechanical automatic movement. Cheapest is 7750 Valjoux that residues about at 1000 price level if one doesnt want wind up or quartz..............

 

But that's exactly my point; mechanical movements are too expensive to be considered elegant solutions to the timekeeping problem.

 

Whereas rangefinder cameras are a very elegant solution to some important photographic issues.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[tomasis7]

But that's exactly my point; mechanical movements are too expensive to be considered elegant solutions to the timekeeping problem.

 

Whereas rangefinder cameras are a very elegant solution to some important photographic issues.

 

hehe mechanical movement is elegant solution to work likely forever without change battery.

 

I hate to have to go to shop to change battery or the watch does stop to work when I rely on this already much.

 

thats elegant solution for you