pgk Posted February 13, 2013 Share #21 Â Posted February 13, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Personally I feel we place just a little too much emphasis on the camera and achieving technically perfect images and too little on developing a unique vision and signature...in my humble opinion only of course... The two are not mutually incompatible;). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 13, 2013 Posted February 13, 2013 Hi pgk, Take a look here What draws you to Leica?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bill Posted February 13, 2013 Share #22  Posted February 13, 2013 Ask a "Lomographer"...  For me, it is all about the journey. There are cheaper cameras that do things better, but as someone on another forum pointed out the other day, photography is meditation with gadgets. Leica produces the finest gadgets for meditation that I can think of. My soul is satisfied when I use my M2 in a way no other camera from another maker can.  Regards,  Bill  Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted February 13, 2013 Share #23  Posted February 13, 2013 For me it's all about spending money. There's really no better way to throw cash into a black hole. And I get an enormous high from buying €4500 lenses even if it means eating cheap processed food, taking the bus, and telling the kids that they have to go to public schools. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 13, 2013 Share #24 Â Posted February 13, 2013 There's really no better way to throw cash into a black hole. Buy a boat:D. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerren Posted February 13, 2013 Share #25 Â Posted February 13, 2013 I bought a Leica so I could join this forum... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted February 14, 2013 Share #26 Â Posted February 14, 2013 For me it is being able to focus manually with a system designed for it.I like to be in control. Â Â Although I design intelligent software, I hate computers that think for you. Â Â It may take more practice to get top results from the M, but at least you can take al the credit for it if you get it right. Â Â Not that I am a hunter but... Using the big/fast/auto gear is like hunting with a machine gun. A result for sure... Â Â Using the M is hunting with a one shot rifle. One shot, one kill, and much more pride when successful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted February 14, 2013 Share #27  Posted February 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) For me it is being able to focus manually with a system designed for it.I like to be in control.  Although I design intelligent software, I hate computers that think for you.   It may take more practice to get top results from the M, but at least you can take al the credit for it if you get it right.   Not that I am a hunter but... Using the big/fast/auto gear is like hunting with a machine gun. A result for sure...  Using the M is hunting with a one shot rifle. One shot, one kill, and much more pride when successful.  Regarding Manual and Auto cameras here is my thinking: ( and I am not taking anything away from dpitt's valid enjoyment and sense of achievement when he gets it right with his M)  What does it matter to the final image who got the credit? The owner of the image may wax lyrical about how fine an experience it was to use his tool but as a viewer, who cares?  And to use the analogy of the trophy hunter, who cares what you used to shoot with if its a tiny female with short horns that's not in the Roland Ward...in fact most hunters just laugh at the guys with the fancy rifles that can't hit the target and must be saved by the PH and his stock standard rifle. And no, I don't hunt, never have and never will, but I live in a hunting mad country...so I know all the stories. and any hunter will tell you that you are a fool when you go hunting with just one bullet. Do you go photographing with just one exposure? I am sure some do, I have, but that's irresponsible when someone else pays for your expertise.  Here I am not taking anything away from the pleasure of having accurate and workable tools...and the Leica is as good as it gets, and I like my tool (not that one!) as much as the next man but to suggest that somehow the pleasure I get from using a fine manual tool as opposed to an automatic tool somehow makes the image more valid and beautiful just doesn't make any sense..  Even worse is to suggest that an automatic camera that thinks for me, is therefore less valid, just makes me smile. Why on earth would a little motor that turns the focusing on a spot of my selection be taking any thinking away from me? Especially if its quicker and more accurate? If I used 'zone focus' would that also take 'thinking' away from me? And even if it does, so what, what has that got to do with the final image, and the viewer looking at it?  Here is an image of mine, does it matter what lens or camera was used? If you like it would you like it less if a Sony a77 and plastic zoom was used and if you don't like it would you like it more if you new it was made with an M9 and 35mm lux asph? 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/198108-what-draws-you-to-leica/?do=findComment&comment=2242966'>More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted February 14, 2013 Share #28 Â Posted February 14, 2013 I think the majority of level headed people would agree (at least I hope so.) The problem with threads like this is that they eventually end up taking on a weird kind of religiosity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted February 15, 2013 Share #29 Â Posted February 15, 2013 What does it matter to the final image who got the credit? The owner of the image may wax lyrical about how fine an experience it was to use his tool but as a viewer, who cares? I do agree that the viewer had nothing to do with my answer. And even the OP's question does not seem to involve the viewer. But from commercial point of view you are right. If someone hires you to shoot a wedding, all that matters is the end result, not how it was achieved. Â I never get paid for my photographs. In most cases I even end up giving away the prints I make. Not because they are that bad, but because the picture taking process was part of the goal in itself. When I am on my own, using my M to capture 'the moment' or view I see, that is what matters. Others might meditate, play football or run a few miles in circles to clear their head. I take pictures... Â It is very rare that I accept an assignment to shoot an event. It will always be from from friend or family if that happens and in that case my approach is very different. Â So when I am shooting for myself it matters how the picture was made. I do not enjoy lugging around a ton of gear and shooting thousands of pictures hoping there is one that will be a keeper. That is what I see some people do. They set everything on auto and shoot a few GB of pictures. My statement is very extreme, I know, and I do not think members of this forum are doing only that. It is just that the more I rely on AF, AE and the computing power of the camera, the smaller is the relaxing effect of my shooting activity. In a way my IIIF with Elmar 50 would be ideal for relacing. I really enjoy using it, but then I do not like the process of developing and scanning the film, and in most cases I do not even have the time to do so. Â Maybe I should try shooting without film in the camera, just to relax but I am sure that would not do it for me either... Â And to use the analogy of the trophy hunter, who cares what you used to shoot with if its a tiny female with short horns that's not in the Roland Ward...in fact most hunters just laugh at the guys with the fancy rifles that can't hit the target and must be saved by the PH and his stock standard rifle. And no, I don't hunt, never have and never will, but I live in a hunting mad country...so I know all the stories. and any hunter will tell you that you are a fool when you go hunting with just one bullet. Do you go photographing with just one exposure? I am sure some do, I have, but that's irresponsible when someone else pays for your expertise. You are right, making analogies is always inadequate... Rest assured, in general the objects I shoot are quite harmless Even worse is to suggest that an automatic camera that thinks for me, is therefore less valid, just makes me smile. Why on earth would a little motor that turns the focusing on a spot of my selection be taking any thinking away from me? Especially if its quicker and more accurate? If I used 'zone focus' would that also take 'thinking' away from me? And even if it does, so what, what has that got to do with the final image, and the viewer looking at it? And then you show me a picture that seems to prove my point. I think it can only be made with everything manual. Correct me if I am wrong: 1. With AF on, the focus would have been on the woman in front, unless you would have shifted the focus point, which I hate because I suck at it. Using MF is faster for me. 2. With AE you would probably have overexposed because of the dark clothing of the woman in front. 3. Program or 'Full Auto' mode would probably have chosen a smaller diaphragm with less DOF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted February 15, 2013 Share #30  Posted February 15, 2013  So when I am shooting for myself it matters how the picture was made.  And then you show me a picture that seems to prove my point. I think it can only be made with everything manual. Correct me if I am wrong: 1. With AF on, the focus would have been on the woman in front, unless you would have shifted the focus point, which I hate because I suck at it. Using MF is faster for me. 2. With AE you would probably have overexposed because of the dark clothing of the woman in front. 3. Program or 'Full Auto' mode would probably have chosen a smaller diaphragm with less DOF  Dirk,  We all make photographs for different reasons, some do it for the images, to make a living, to relax...some do it because they like the process and using a specific tool... some even like the whole darkroom process, I did but disliked the smell. I have no beef with that and if someone tells me his M9 is the best tool for him, I don't have a beef with that either, and if someone says that he likes all the manual functions and that he likes the slow process or whatever that the M gives him, I have no problem with that either. Each to his own and some of us can use expensive toys and some of us cant, that's just life and nothing wrong with either.  My point is that letting the camera decide the exposure and using autofocus doesn't take any control away from me. For me, and I stress just for me, Af is much faster and accurate than Mf, for you it might be different. for me auto exposure is a no brainer, years of photography and thousands of images have taught me when I can rely on auto exposre and when I cant. I have almost never used my X1 on manual exposure and almost every single exposure has been ok or if it was not spot on I could easily fix it in post. it has a very good exposure meter. With my dslr I usually dial in half a stop overexposure and although its generally not as accurate as the X1 exposure wise the sensor has so much latitude that I can easily overexpose by 1 1/2 stops and still have plenty of highlight detail and then my shadows are much cleaner too. When I use my shift lenses for interiors I usually use manual exposure. The point I am trying to make is that as a full time professional I have learned over the years what works and what doesn't... what I can leave on auto and what I cant.  My X1 is used mostly at f11 and zone focus and auto exposure, just so that I don't have to think of anything else but the image and framing, but hey that's just me  As a professional I have to shoots lots of images under varying different conditions and of all sorts of subject matter. In January I did a food shoot for a national pizza chain, a Celebrity DJ, copied a painting for a well known local artist and spend two hours in a squatter camp photographing poor and unemployed people for a client. I enjoyed each assignment and had to use a variety of techniques and shooting styles. I used MF, AF, live view, zoom lenses and prime lenses, tripods, handheld and flashes, auto exposure and manual exposure. The point I am trying to make is that no technique or camera or lens is superior or better than another. We all use what works for us. But to imply that one make of camera is superior to another make, or one way of shooting is superior to another, or workflow or aperture or iso, etc etc well that just makes me smile...btw many of the images were made at 800-1600 iso and printed A2 size for the clients showroom and the quality was superb!  Lastly re the image. Sorry to disappoint you ...dslr camera and zoom lens, auto focus, yes I did move the focus point and no it doesn't suck for me and auto exposure...only thing that was set was the aperture because this particular lens is sharpest at f11 and I like lots of things to be in focus. Dynamic range is wide enough that it can easily capture shadow and highlight detail..anyway on a scene like this the values cancel each other out and its actually an even gray, so quite easy for the camera to make an accurate exposure....Is this way of shooting superior to yours? No of course not, and I would never try and convince you otherwise, but it just illustrates that all of us have a different way of working and use tools that work for us.  FYI a link to the Portraits of the Poor here Ivan Muller, the lazy travel photographer ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyalf Posted February 15, 2013 Share #31 Â Posted February 15, 2013 I was drawn to Leica through the RD-1. For me this was the ultmate digital camera in terms of handling. Â What attracts me with M9 is the simplicity and compact no-nonsense form factor, although its not on pair with the RD-1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted February 16, 2013 Share #32 Â Posted February 16, 2013 Hi Ivan, Â Thank you for explaining. I am really surprised that the photo was taken AF. But as you said, you had to shift the focus point... Â I never got used to that on my Nikon D70. The only thing I would probably be able to get used to is a dslr with AF lock and the focus point in the middle and then use the same process of focus/reframe/shoot as with the M. Â It is probably just me getting old. Started with a Nikon FE in the 70s when only manual lenses were available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted February 16, 2013 Share #33 Â Posted February 16, 2013 Simplicity and quality. Support. I don't care about the cost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted February 18, 2013 Share #34  Posted February 18, 2013 Hi Ivan, Thank you for explaining. I am really surprised that the photo was taken AF. But as you said, you had to shift the focus point...  I never got used to that on my Nikon D70. The only thing I would probably be able to get used to is a dslr with AF lock and the focus point in the middle and then use the same process of focus/reframe/shoot as with the M.  It is probably just me getting old. Started with a Nikon FE in the 70s when only manual lenses were available.  Hi Dirk,  I started in the late 70's...and only got my first AF in 2004........as I too get older I feel a need to focus on the essentials, which with my X1 I have managed to get down to viewing and framing...all else gets taken care of by the camera...and for me its very liberating to just pick up the camera, bring it to my eye, frame and press the shutter...now for me that's the ultimate simplicity. Imo the image come first the how and why is secondary...but of course that's just me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bundestrainer Posted February 18, 2013 Share #35 Â Posted February 18, 2013 For me shooting with the M9 and controlling it completely manually is like a treasure hunt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted February 18, 2013 Share #36 Â Posted February 18, 2013 I like the red dot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bideford Posted February 18, 2013 Share #37 Â Posted February 18, 2013 I like the ease in which I can take out the memory card and battery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted February 18, 2013 Share #38 Â Posted February 18, 2013 I notice in the dSLR forums I read, many of the complaints and questions are about "autofocus" issues, especially with faster lenses or limited DOF. The answers tend to stress how you need to manipulate the camera to tell it what to focus on. Sure seems simpler to me just to use manual focus all the time. Remember, when the Leica II came out they stressed the "automatic focus" - just turn the lens until the rangefinder images converge and it is automatically focused. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted February 20, 2013 Share #39 Â Posted February 20, 2013 Well, where I live the Leica showroom was next to Louis Vuitton. When my wife walked into the latter, I did not want to follow her and walked into Leica. The rest is history. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgenper Posted February 20, 2013 Share #40 Â Posted February 20, 2013 I like the ease in which I can take out the memory card and battery. Â :rolleyes: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.