Jeff S Posted June 18, 2015 Share #21 Posted June 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Quite often now I will use a handheld meter with a digital camera I am using and fully nail it because I simply can not stand being distracted by constantly looking at a photo I just took when I should be continually seeing the next shot. To add to that, I shoot Tmax 400 pushed to 800 in both my film M's and my Mamiya 6. In most cases, I don't have to consult my meter anymore, I just know light that well. If you know the light that well, then why the need to frequently meter with a digital camera, and not with film? Light is light. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 18, 2015 Posted June 18, 2015 Hi Jeff S, Take a look here The M240 as a professional tool. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rscheffler Posted June 18, 2015 Share #22 Posted June 18, 2015 Hi all, It had been a long while ago, since this was posted but i just found it through google research. I am using Lightroom exclusively for all organising and post processing of Canon and M-P (240) files. Now I try to change my workflow and involving Photomechanic (5) as LR just takes too much time in many situations. First I could not see my images clearly at all. Now I figured out that I had to change the quality as well as to rendering RAW files. Now I get a good preview but it takes even longer thank LR. Have i missed something or does PM just not work for Leica DNGs? Regards, Florian It depends. Lightroom renders various levels of preview quality (I believe it depend on how you have it set up). One set of previews might be sufficient for you to view the entire image at your screen resolution, but when you want to zoom in to actual pixel level detail, it may have to render the image again for that size, which causes some delay. I believe it depends on how you have it set up for this. I.e. whether you're rendering full resolution previews immediately for all files, or just 'on demand' as you zoom in on a select few. With Photo Mechanic, it's all or nothing. If you have it set to render previews from RAW files, it's rendering the full resolution file. How quickly it does this is directly dependent on the speed of your computer. If you're working with something relatively lightweight in terms of processing power, it will of course take longer. I use Photo Mechanic exclusively for making my selections and adding metadata (captions, keywords, etc.). In part because my background is in photojournalism and Photo Mechanic is the gold standard for most photographers in this field. My process is to export a set of full resolution Jpegs from the M240 DNGs. Depending on the number, this can take some time, during which I work on other things. Once the Jpegs have been exported, I put them in the same folder as the DNGs. Photo Mechanic can be set up to 'pair' DNGs and Jpegs with the same file name as a single thumbnail. In this way, when you preview an image, you view the Jpeg (if the preferences are set accordingly), which allows the computer to render the preview near instantaneously. And anything you do during this time is applied to both files. Things such as colour or star ratings, captions, keywords, etc. Once I have made my selections, I move all of the Jpegs to their own folder, either to keep in the shoot specific folder, or to eventually delete (because for me they are just temporary files from which to determine sharpness and not for actual image editing use). I do this specifically so that I can 'fly' through shoots (sometimes hundreds or thousands of images) quickly in the culling stage so that I don't have to wait on image renders. Sure, LR can build the previews similarly, but for me it has always felt slow in comparison. Another option is to set the camera to shoot DNG+Jpeg. This works fine if you typically take one at a time, rather than shoot sequences. But for my needs, it simply bogs down the camera too much. Anyway, this is what works for me with Photo Mechanic... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rscheffler Posted June 18, 2015 Share #23 Posted June 18, 2015 Oh, and regarding the original sentiments expressed in this thread by its creator, I completely agree. That said, where I think the M240 stumbles as a professional tool is Leica's poor service support. Turnaround times are ridiculously too long. 4-8 weeks for many things. Meanwhile Canon here promises 4 days for CPS members. But in some respects, I don't even care about that because they also provide immediate loaners. I love my Leica camera and lenses, but I never feel I can completely rely on the system, at least when it comes to paid work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
picboy Posted June 18, 2015 Share #24 Posted June 18, 2015 i use my 1Dx's for editorial stuff. they are quick, sturdy, and allow me to use a set of zooms that cover the ranges. I need to get images on the wire asap, so no messing around. however, on a travel assignment, the leica 240 works. they are really small to pack with a few lenses, get past customs and don't draw attention like the SLR. they are slower to work with, but produce files that can be used for publication. (actually more mega pixels than my canons) plus my mac can read the cards with the built in reader (1Dx uses CF cards). I use photomechanic backed up by PS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 18, 2015 Share #25 Posted June 18, 2015 Oh, that depends on how you were trained, I have shot film for about 40 of my 48 years and digital for nearly 22. Quite often now I will use a handheld meter with a digital camera I am using and fully nail it because I simply can not stand being distracted by constantly looking at a photo I just took when I should be continually seeing the next shot. To add to that, I shoot Tmax 400 pushed to 800 in both my film M's and my Mamiya 6. In most cases, I don't have to consult my meter anymore, I just know light that well. Not everyone has to constantly depend on looking at the back of the camera, some of us have developed a deeper skill set than that. Film is generally more tolerant of exposure errors because it does not clip highlights. I know the light, but my estimates could be a good half stop or more out. Especially when it comes to highlights, the histogram is an important tool. Another advantage of the LCD, it allows you to check that focus was 100% dead on. It is not a matter of depending on looking on the back of the camera. Rather it is better to verify everything for trust in experience is not quite as reliable. The ability to trust but verify is an advantage digital provides. And an ability the M9 is not very good at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted June 18, 2015 Share #26 Posted June 18, 2015 Oh, and regarding the original sentiments expressed in this thread by its creator, I completely agree. That said, where I think the M240 stumbles as a professional tool is Leica's poor service support. Turnaround times are ridiculously too long. 4-8 weeks for many things. Meanwhile Canon here promises 4 days for CPS members. But in some respects, I don't even care about that because they also provide immediate loaners. I love my Leica camera and lenses, but I never feel I can completely rely on the system, at least when it comes to paid work. Agreed on the turn round time - though Leica Mayfair have been very good with loan cameras on two occasions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 18, 2015 Share #27 Posted June 18, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wonder how often Jane Bown blamed her Pentax or Don McCullin blamed his Nikon F? Probably endlessly if todays pro's are to be understood, so imagine what they could have done if only they'd had a Leica M240 Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai_Print Posted June 18, 2015 Share #28 Posted June 18, 2015 If you know the light that well, then why the need to frequently meter with a digital camera, and not with film? Light is light. Jeff A simple matter of changing the ISO a lot more often on digital while not at all on the film M's so the extrapolation adds a step throws me a bit. Also I shoot color only in digital, a major shift in predominate color cast can often change the exposure a fair bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai_Print Posted June 18, 2015 Share #29 Posted June 18, 2015 Film is generally more tolerant of exposure errors because it does not clip highlights. I know the light, but my estimates could be a good half stop or more out. Especially when it comes to highlights, the histogram is an important tool. Another advantage of the LCD, it allows you to check that focus was 100% dead on. It is not a matter of depending on looking on the back of the camera. Rather it is better to verify everything for trust in experience is not quite as reliable. The ability to trust but verify is an advantage digital provides. And an ability the M9 is not very good at. I don't disagree with this, I have turned into a pretty good human meter though and I am usually within a 1/2 stop. It's funny too, we all extol the virtues of how much better RF focusing is compared to other methods and then it all ends up being out of whack often enough to drive a person crazy. All this said, I caved a few minutes ago and bought a good used M240...DOH! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 18, 2015 Share #30 Posted June 18, 2015 And so it begins......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted June 18, 2015 Share #31 Posted June 18, 2015 A cheaper alternative to Photo Mechanic, if you do not need to manipulate metadata, and want faster access to previews than Lightroom provides, is available here: http://www.fastrawviewer.com (There are other such viewers http://www.fastpictureviewer.com or http://www.faststone.org that seem to use the embedded jpeg, as Photo Mechanic does.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 18, 2015 Share #32 Posted June 18, 2015 A simple matter of changing the ISO a lot more often on digital while not at all on the film M's so the extrapolation adds a step throws me a bit. Also I shoot color only in digital, a major shift in predominate color cast can often change the exposure a fair bit. They probably blamed them just as much as everybody else does. We will probably never know, nor care. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted June 19, 2015 Share #33 Posted June 19, 2015 Oh, and regarding the original sentiments expressed in this thread by its creator, I completely agree. That said, where I think the M240 stumbles as a professional tool is Leica's poor service support. Turnaround times are ridiculously too long. 4-8 weeks for many things. Meanwhile Canon here promises 4 days for CPS members. But in some respects, I don't even care about that because they also provide immediate loaners. I love my Leica camera and lenses, but I never feel I can completely rely on the system, at least when it comes to paid work. My history with CPS in Australia wasn't nearly as favourable. It matters not if your camera can be repaired in 4 days if you're on the road away from a CPS centre and need it the next morning. I got a loaner exactly once in 12 years. Every other time they needed the stock for a "show" or sports event. When they started charging for the service and saying all pros needed 1 series bodies i dropped Canon and moved to Leica. I made sure i could get through in case of an issue by making sure I was prepared. Canon were terribly unreliable. I've had some issues with Leica and every other brand I've owned (except strangely Sony). I've learned the only one you can rely on is yourself. So i make sure I have all the required backups ready to go, myself. I'd like Leica to be faster in repair turnaround but I've taken that into account when I put my working kit together. I have an M240 away for calibration now. Expect it back in 8 weeks or so. I will still be able to work in the meantime without any outside assistance. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 19, 2015 Share #34 Posted June 19, 2015 I don't disagree with this, I have turned into a pretty good human meter though and I am usually within a 1/2 stop. It's funny too, we all extol the virtues of how much better RF focusing is compared to other methods and then it all ends up being out of whack often enough to drive a person crazy. Autofocus is essentially a tiny rangefinder on a microchip and a motor in a lens. An autofocus system is not 100% reliable. And this is due to a lack of mechanical precision in the lens, the motor does not always meet the exact position the camera commands it to. Or the cameras mirror or phase AF chip might be out of alignment. But even when the alignment in tuned with micro AF adjust, there is still variation. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-1-center-point-single-shot-accuracy http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras Leica's out of the box mechanical precision ensures the rangefinder system is more reliable. The weak link becomes your eye and finger. I find the focus misses are no more frequent than autofocus, and in low light the Rangefinder misses focus much less frequently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 19, 2015 Share #35 Posted June 19, 2015 I have an M240 away for calibration now. Expect it back in 8 weeks or so. I will still be able to work in the meantime without any outside assistance. Are you using Camera Clinic in Melbourne? The lack of an authorised Leica repair facility in NSW is quite frustrating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai_Print Posted June 19, 2015 Share #36 Posted June 19, 2015 Leica's out of the box mechanical precision ensures the rangefinder system is more reliable. The weak link becomes your eye and finger. I find the focus misses are no more frequent than autofocus, and in low light the Rangefinder misses focus much less frequently.If it is calibrated then yes, RF is far more reliable in low light for sure. I find once I take the time to dial in each Nikkor on each body, it makes a huge difference in hit rate. But with RF you don't really have any adjustments so if bodies or lenses are off, you are out the gear for too long. Right now my three M lenses and two M film bodies are spot on, the 240 from Leica I shot over the weekend was also spot on so the lenses are in spec. I get my 240 next week, hopefully it is dead on too and if it is not, I have an inside contact at Leica NJ who can turn it around pretty quickly. I know a number of pros who really want to put a Leica into their kit but they have got to up their game in meeting demands for loaners and fast service.....but alas, Leica know this... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted June 19, 2015 Share #37 Posted June 19, 2015 Leica's out of the box mechanical precision ensures the rangefinder system is more reliable. The weak link becomes your eye and finger. I find the focus misses are no more frequent than autofocus, and in low light the Rangefinder misses focus much less frequently. You should say which AF camera and lens you are comparing to. There's a lot of crappy AF stuff on the market (for example, the 5D2 AF is a joke). A 1Dx with a good lens will be much more consistent than a RF used by an experienced photographer, especially in low light. Let alone moving subjects, focusing speed, and focusing off-center. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted June 19, 2015 Share #38 Posted June 19, 2015 You should say which AF camera and lens you are comparing to. There's a lot of crappy AF stuff on the market (for example, the 5D2 AF is a joke). A 1Dx with a good lens will be much more consistent than a RF used by an experienced photographer, especially in low light. Let alone moving subjects, focusing speed, and focusing off-center. A 5D Mark III. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted June 19, 2015 Share #39 Posted June 19, 2015 Are you using Camera Clinic in Melbourne? The lack of an authorised Leica repair facility in NSW is quite frustrating. Camera Clinic aren't authorised to work on type 240's, thankfully. They all go to Germany (although via CC, which takes extra time). Especially as mine is a warranty claim. Anyway, based on past experiences I won't allow them to even evaluate any of my gear. I require them to send it to Germany. Personally I would be pleased if Leica found another service agent in Australia. Others have had different experiences but my interaction with CC has been 100% negative. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted June 19, 2015 Share #40 Posted June 19, 2015 You should say which AF camera and lens you are comparing to. There's a lot of crappy AF stuff on the market (for example, the 5D2 AF is a joke). There is some rubbish stated on this forum - have you actually used a 5D2? Mine are perfectly viable TOOLS. Their AF is perfectly acceptable and I use it in situations where I cannot use MF. and require precision focus. Period. Actually I'm a bit baffled by this thread. All digital Ms are fine as pro cameras depending of course on what you want to do with them and what you expect out of them. The caveat is all important of course. And my experience with Leica's Pro service has exceeded expectation and far better than the my experience of CPS (or further back in time, Nikon's Pro, although I've only had to use it once or twice (only once for a camera fault I think - the other was accidental damage). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.