Jump to content

I love my M


Paulus

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I love my new M too!

 

I had an M6 but sold it 10 years ago to get into digital. Since then, I tried to love various Nikons (most recently a D800E) as well as the very good Fuji X series (X-Pro and X100). I did the math, compared features, and deduced that a digital Leica just isn't worth it. BUT...

 

The reality is that there is a HUGE difference. In one word, it's all about "Workflow". The process of shooting is totally different.

With the M it feels like you're an artist creating something that could be a masterpiece.

With the D800E, it feels like you're behind the keyboard of a powerful PC: the results are very good, but there's no enjoyment and no art.

 

For street, travel, landscape, and architectural shooting, I think the M is faster and better. Yes, faster, even without AF.

An example- let's say you're in a NYC cab at dusk and see a street vendor in an animated exchange. With the D800E (or any DSLR), the workflow inevitably involves:

- exposure lock on an appropriate part of the scene (not on the subject's face because it will overexpose and make it look like daylight); so you frame and lock exposure

- AF lock on the subject's face -- in between this and the above you are reframing and entering the AF lock mode vs AE lock (hope you have your settings right!)

- recompose and shoot

The cab has probably pulled away by now and you've missed the shot.

We haven't even discussed shutter and ISO.

 

With the M, your workflow ends up almost predicting the settings for exposure. You can intuitively set aperture and shutter based on available light. It helps that the lenses are fast and don't jeopardize quality wide open (unlike other lenses).

So by the time the M comes to my eye, I'm already at a close aperture and shutter, and I can fine tune shutter easily by looking at the indicator. The way the viewfinder metering works, it's always on and I can point it at a suitably lit part of the scene and get the right exposure. I don't have to set "AE lock to on". Furthermore, I have more latitude with slow shutter speeds because it's mirrorless.

Focus is actually very accurate and fast. Even with the highly advanced D800, it often guesses AF points incorrectly. It's nowhere near as smart as your brain!

 

This was just a brief informal comparison. I haven't even touched on lens quality and body build quality.

Overall, yes, Leica is expensive, but oh is it worth it!!

 

No offense intended, but what you are writing does not make sense to me. You can lift a d800 as fast to your eye as you can lift a Leica and even an MF Ninja will have a hard time to focus as fast as the Nikon. Just use the dedicated AF thumb button, frame (above Leica Ninja has to reframe as well) and fire away.

 

Guess it all comes down to practise.

 

But I got to say that I also love my new Leica. To me she's not not the fastest, and I doubt she ever will be. But she sure is the most beautiful! :)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Its been 6 weeks with my M-P and I'm still excited and blown away with the shooting experience and image quality.

(this image shot on a Nikon D800)

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!

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm...what exactly prevents you to use your D800 in the same matter?

 

Just switch the camera to M ( manual ) and you're in the full control of shutter & aperture. I use my Nikon Df this way all the time ( often with manual lenses, too )

Random AF points? Do not allow camera to do the job for you. Choose singe focus point - you can even decide which one to use ( no need for recomposing )

If you want to use only the one in the center ( pretty much like M behaves ) - so be it...

 

Do not get me wrong...I love my M-P, but these are the facts...

 

Regards / Alex

 

 




With the M, your workflow ends up almost predicting the settings for exposure. You can intuitively set aperture and shutter based on available light. It helps that the lenses are fast and don't jeopardize quality wide open (unlike other lenses).
So by the time the M comes to my eye, I'm already at a close aperture and shutter, and I can fine tune shutter easily by looking at the indicator. The way the viewfinder metering works, it's always on and I can point it at a suitably lit part of the scene and get the right exposure. I don't have to set "AE lock to on". Furthermore, I have more latitude with slow shutter speeds because it's mirrorless.
Focus is actually very accurate and fast. Even with the highly advanced D800, it often guesses AF points incorrectly. It's nowhere near as smart as your brain!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paulus -- I really enjoyed looking at those. So much more interesting than pictures of cameras. And the light is gorgeously rendered, as you rightly say.

Thank you Alun. Still I never get bored of looking at Leica M pictures of other owners and what they have done with their camera to make it even more special. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to trade, craigslist, and scrounge all the cash I had around the house--I landed a Safari edition as well.  Stupid what it cost.  It was the 'first' time in many years I HAD to have a camera.  Now it stares at me wondering why i'm not taking pictures with it....time will come. Grabbed the Canons for assignment work last night--images were published from Bangor to Tokyo.  That Safari needs to get too work.  But in the meantime, it's worth every dollar just sitting on my desk.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm...what exactly prevents you to use your D800 in the same matter?

 

Just switch the camera to M ( manual ) and you're in the full control of shutter & aperture. I use my Nikon Df this way all the time ( often with manual lenses, too )

Random AF points? Do not allow camera to do the job for you. Choose singe focus point - you can even decide which one to use ( no need for recomposing )

If you want to use only the one in the center ( pretty much like M behaves ) - so be it...

 

Do not get me wrong...I love my M-P, but these are the facts...

 

Regards / Alex

 

I agree that Surge exaggerates the difference.

However, manually selecting the AF points (I use a Canon 5D Mark III) tends to take just as long and often longer than manually focusing a rangefinder. Hyperfocal focusing for action also tends to work more predictably and reliably than autofocus. I would argue that in most situations the Rangefinder is easier to work with, faster and more accurate than AF.

The main advantage of autofocus is the ability to shoot moving subjects with wide open apertures, i.e. a 35mm 1.4 lens on the street, you can shoot wide open and track people walking without issue. Or in sports or wildlife, shooting with 2.8 tele lens. These things are too difficult to do with a rangefinder.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that Surge exaggerates the difference.

However, manually selecting the AF points (I use a Canon 5D Mark III) tends to take just as long and often longer than manually focusing a rangefinder. Hyperfocal focusing for action also tends to work more predictably and reliably than autofocus. I would argue that in most situations the Rangefinder is easier to work with, faster and more accurate than AF.

The main advantage of autofocus is the ability to shoot moving subjects with wide open apertures, i.e. a 35mm 1.4 lens on the street, you can shoot wide open and track people walking without issue. Or in sports or wildlife, shooting with 2.8 tele lens. These things are too difficult to do with a rangefinder.

 

The problem I have with manually focusing the range finder comes when I want to shoot something at, say, 50/1.4, that's way at the edge of the frame. It's tough to get that in focus. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem I have with manually focusing the range finder comes when I want to shoot something at, say, 50/1.4, that's way at the edge of the frame. It's tough to get that in focus. 

 

Never doubt the efficacy of the central rangefinder focusing rectangle to deliver sharpness and clarity when used with a correctly calibrated rangefinder and lens. No matter where the subject you're trying to focus on is located within the rangefinder field, if you put it into the center window, then focus accurately and recompose………you'll have your shot. It's essential to remember that only the central rectangle will show you the effects of turning the focus ring. With practice it can happen in the blink of an eye.

 

PS. One of the great advantages of a Leica RF camera is that the picture in the optical viewfinder never changes except in the central rectangle……., unless you're in live view or using the EVF, the M IS NOT a through-the-lens arrangement like a DSLR. Therefore, whether you're at f1.4 or f22, nothing should impede your ability to focus exactly on your point of choice.

 

JZG 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that Surge exaggerates the difference.

However, manually selecting the AF points (I use a Canon 5D Mark III) tends to take just as long and often longer than manually focusing a rangefinder. Hyperfocal focusing for action also tends to work more predictably and reliably than autofocus. I would argue that in most situations the Rangefinder is easier to work with, faster and more accurate than AF.

The main advantage of autofocus is the ability to shoot moving subjects with wide open apertures, i.e. a 35mm 1.4 lens on the street, you can shoot wide open and track people walking without issue. Or in sports or wildlife, shooting with 2.8 tele lens. These things are too difficult to do with a rangefinder.

 

I do not find manually selecting the AF points to be lengthy process  ( I use NIkon Df ). But I can accept some people might dislike it. 

In that case - use only central AF point and recompose.  You would get pretty much the same behavior as with RF...

 

As much I like RF and I use my M-P almost 80% of time - I still cannot see how rangefinder could be faster than AF?

And I think I am rather skilled with my Leica...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never doubt the efficacy of the central rangefinder focusing rectangle to deliver sharpness and clarity when used with a correctly calibrated rangefinder and lens. No matter where the subject you're trying to focus on is located within the rangefinder field, if you put it into the center window, then focus accurately and recompose………you'll have your shot.

 

 

I'll have to disagree on this. Using fast lenses ( f 1.4 and faster ) and recomposing is not that easy task...

Using outer AF points on DSLR will be more safe in most cases...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll have to disagree on this. Using fast lenses ( f 1.4 and faster ) and recomposing is not that easy task...

Using outer AF points on DSLR will be more safe in most cases...

AF on a DSLR is not a panacea. At the end it is a sensor (however sophisticated) with algorithm (again, however sophisticated), which can only be close to human judgment but not supersede. See below.

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20120811_2-NikonD800-autofocus-precison.html

 

If you have time (and if camera supports off center zoom. M doesn't) then best focusing solution is liveview with zoom. The second best solution is *still* RF focusing and recompose. Fast lenses with razor thin DOF will cause problems with AF too. I have had many out of focus shots with my Canon 85 f1.2. After moving to Leica world my out of focus shots decreased dramatically. 

 

Of course, if you are in a hurry or subject is moving all over the place then automation wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AF on a DSLR is not a panacea. At the end it is a sensor (however sophisticated) with algorithm (again, however sophisticated), which can only be close to human judgment but not supersede. See below.

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20120811_2-NikonD800-autofocus-precison.html

 

If you have time (and if camera supports off center zoom. M doesn't) then best focusing solution is liveview with zoom. The second best solution is *still* RF focusing and recompose. Fast lenses with razor thin DOF will cause problems with AF too. I have had many out of focus shots with my Canon 85 f1.2. After moving to Leica world my out of focus shots decreased dramatically. 

 

Of course, if you are in a hurry or subject is moving all over the place then automation wins.

 

 

When you use RF ( or a central AF point on DSLR ) and than recompose you inevitably move the camera and change the relative angle and distance towards your subject.

Than you simply have to compensate for that.

However sophisticated human algorithm you might think it is in doing that - I am not convinced it can compare to AF algorithm of pro-DSLR's...

 

( That is probably the main reason the most of RF images you find on the net are composed and focused in the center of frame... )

 

I am not saying - it is not possible, because it is ( I do it all the time ) - but that easy it is not ( at least with fast lenses )

 

 

And again - if outer AF points are not precise enough,  use central AF point and recompose. Like you would do with your RF...

On any pro-DSLR central AF point  is very precise and lightning fast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh from all this talk you'd think there was never a sharp photograph taken with a fast lens prior to the advent of modern autofocus.  Maybe it's because film was more forgiving, maybe it's because we didn't examine everything at 100% enlargement on a high-def monitor.  Maybe we should take a step back and re-evaluate our priorities as to what makes a great photograph. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....On any pro-DSLR central AF point  is very precise and lightning fast.

I had posted Lloyd Chambers link above about AF in Nikon pro body. Just to illustrate that AF has limitations (just like RF has, in different way).

 

He says:

"So here’s the bottom line: can I point a Nikon D800 + ƒ/1.4 prime at a subject at a moderate to far distance, hit the AF button and consistently get a sharply-focused image at ƒ/1.4 or ƒ/2? The answer is a resounding “NO”.

 

I also see people making too much fuss about focus and recompose being inadequate. Yes, RF center focusing and recompose can throw you off due to distance change and curvature. But it is only an issue with very wide aperture. In this situation, AF also struggles and it is a hit and miss. There is a reason why still newly introduced Canikon bodies boast about "improved" auto focusing (meaning previouse model was inadequate). There is still room for improvement here.

Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheesh from all this talk you'd think there was never a sharp photograph taken with a fast lens prior to the advent of modern autofocus.  Maybe it's because film was more forgiving, maybe it's because we didn't examine everything at 100% enlargement on a high-def monitor.  Maybe we should take a step back and re-evaluate our priorities as to what makes a great photograph. 

 

On the contrary. Everything I wrote here came as reaction to one of the previous statements, that you almost cannot make a single photo if you do not use RF and that you're handicapped on the streets, if you by any chance use DSLR. That is simply not true...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I also see people making too much fuss about focus and recompose being inadequate. Yes, RF center focusing and recompose can throw you off due to distance change and curvature. But it is only an issue with very wide aperture.

 

...and that is exactly what I was talking all the time - recomposing fast lenses wide open...

 

Not in my pictures. :)

 

...and not in mine, either... B)

Edited by profus
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrary. Everything I wrote here came as reaction to one of the previous statements, that you almost cannot make a single photo if you do not use RF and that you're handicapped on the streets, if you by any chance use DSLR. That is simply not true...

DSLRs and RFs are both photographic tools. Both have handicaps.. and strengths.

Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...