CheshireCat Posted December 6, 2014 Share #481 Posted December 6, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) So photography in PP... Why not... Matter of tastes... I prefer in the field but YMMV. Reminds me HCB who said that he was not interested by his photos once they were shot. Weird. I wonder why Henri was not much into digital photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 6, 2014 Posted December 6, 2014 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
J M Hughes Posted December 7, 2014 Share #482 Posted December 7, 2014 Do you still find some art in this kind of photography? In the days when cameras were big and bulky, and not easily manoeuvred, 'Composition' was always something that happened in the darkroom. The idea that you could easily produce a perfectly-composed shot with a large stand-mounted camera is fanciful. Even those shooting 6x6cm on (say) a Rolleiflex often tended to compose knowing they would be cropping their images later in order to obtain the desired result. As cameras got smaller, and viewfinders bigger and brighter, being able to frame the shot became easier. But (due to smaller lower quality negatives) it became necessary too. With smaller negs, you no longer had quality to spare. Hence the recommendation to 35mm photographers - 'fill the frame'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolaz Posted December 7, 2014 Share #483 Posted December 7, 2014 I'm not sure about the relationship between art and cropping and if we want to be picky, Leica framing is inaccurate by definition, there is a bit of inconsistency in my opinion. Either ways don't waste your shots, there are a lot of crazy picture out there never published because they haven't been framed properly. It's a shame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 8, 2014 Share #484 Posted December 8, 2014 Never happen. (Subject is open source firmware) Because too few owners care? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2014 Share #485 Posted December 8, 2014 (Subject is open source firmware) Because too few owners care? I am afraid this is because a change of mentality is required. Leica is a very traditional company, and change is long overdue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 8, 2014 Share #486 Posted December 8, 2014 (Subject is open source firmware) Because too few owners care? Not really. There is more than one entity involved and some wouldn't give permission. It was that way with another brand I dealt with for years and that brand has their fingers in this one now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted December 8, 2014 Share #487 Posted December 8, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am afraid this is because a change of mentality is required.Leica is a very traditional company, and change is long overdue. So are SAP, Microsoft, Apple, Canon and Nikon, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 8, 2014 Share #488 Posted December 8, 2014 ...As cameras got smaller, and viewfinders bigger and brighter, being able to frame the shot became easier. But (due to smaller lower quality negatives) it became necessary too. With smaller negs, you no longer had quality to spare. Hence the recommendation to 35mm photographers - 'fill the frame'. I don't think it is a technical issue but a somewhat philosophic one, sorry to sound pedant. For some (most) people, only the result count. For some others the act of taking the photo is more important. Not that i care that much myself to be honest but i'm not interested by 50MP bodies supposed to be stuck on a tripod to get the best results and even less by panoramic pictures supposed to be cropped in PP for composition. Not the Leica spirit at all to me. But again YMMV and i will rest my case against all odds anyway so feel free to ignore my ranting which is directed neither at you nor at any other LUF member . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2014 Share #489 Posted December 8, 2014 Weird. I wonder why Henri was not much into digital photography Actually he was. He was quite ahead of his time in foreseeing the potential. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2014 Share #490 Posted December 8, 2014 I am afraid this is because a change of mentality is required.Leica is a very traditional company, and change is long overdue. Why? What is wrong with not changing mentality? And change to what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 8, 2014 Share #491 Posted December 8, 2014 Actually he was. He was quite ahead of his time in foreseeing the potential. Can you cite a source for this information? I've read many times that Ansel Adams was interested in early digital photography (or at least the potential of it) but not HCB. My understanding is that he was more interested in pencils than cameras towards the end of his life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted December 8, 2014 Share #492 Posted December 8, 2014 Weird. I wonder why Henri was not much into digital photography I seem to remember he didn't like colour either All because someone takes great photos in one genre does not mean their words are gospel I like Wagners music but wouldn't have taken his view on politics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2014 Share #493 Posted December 8, 2014 Can you cite a source for this information? I've read many times that Ansel Adams was interested in early digital photography (or at least the potential of it) but not HCB. My understanding is that he was more interested in pencils than cameras towards the end of his life. There are indeed quite a few Adams quotes on the subject. No - I read it in an interview a long time ago, could'nt reproduce it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wmcl Posted December 8, 2014 Share #494 Posted December 8, 2014 There are indeed quite a few Adams quotes on the subject.No - I read it in an interview a long time ago, could'nt reproduce it. "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them." — Ansel Adams, The Negative (1981, xiii) "I am sure the next step will be the electronic image, and I hope I shall live to see it. I trust that the creative eye will continue to function, whatever technological innovations may develop." — Ansel Adams, Examples: The Making of 40 Photographs (1983, 59) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2014 Share #495 Posted December 8, 2014 Actually he was. He was quite ahead of his time in foreseeing the potential. Interesting. Some links to share ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2014 Share #496 Posted December 8, 2014 #507 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2014 Share #497 Posted December 8, 2014 Why? What is wrong with not changing mentality? And change to what? What's wrong is that something that's wrong and could be fixed by changing mentality . Leica is clearly not a software company, and does not realize that photography has been changing during the years and is moving from a hardware only business to a predominantly software business. They need to do something quick if they do not want to be eventually stuck forever in the lens only business (like Zeiss, and that's not that bad). There are two solutions: 1) Develop your own software in-house, and protect your IP because you think your software is more advanced than the competition. This needs a lot of resources, and is something even giants like Canon, Nikon, and especially Sony are struggling to do right. 2) Use an open OS (Linux, Android, ...), keep a couple developers to half-bake the usual meh firmware on that, and then immediately release the open source project and let the community enhance the camera. If properly done, even end users will be able to configure their own firmware a-la-carte, selecting the firmware branch they like (minimalistic, geeky, etc) and which features to enable, all from their web-browser. Soon you will have a much better camera for free, as people will fix and enhance your product out of passion for photography and tecnology. In my opinion, it is clear that Leica (and not only) should go for solution 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted December 8, 2014 Share #498 Posted December 8, 2014 The camera is perfect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 8, 2014 Author Share #499 Posted December 8, 2014 I am not a buyer of the M(240). What would I want to buy the next iteration? the colour issues of the sensor, AWB and profiles resolved one (the correct) frameline for the lens attached to the camera - how hard could it possibly be? Each lens is coded - read the codes. It can be electronic anyway. the ability to move the focal point when focusing using the EVF either an optical view finder or electronic viewfinder - I don't like the clip on job on the top, but if that's the only solution, at least make it a good one, with the ability to upgrade it. I do like the optical rangefinder, but if you need to use an EVF, I'd rather it was built in. The benefit of the clip on EVF is that you can take it off if you don't want it. But that assumes Leica will upgrade it (we know what happened there - the next version wasn't compatible). I like having a dial for ISO or exposure compensation I'm not too bothered by the 14-24-36 MP sensor options. More megapixels are great, provided they give real advantage high ISO doesn't bother me improved dynamic range would be good What I really want is a camera which preserves the purity of my M9 and takes wonderful pictures with my fabulous Leica lenses ... I started this thread a year ago. What has changed? The T has arrived, and I guess the jury is out. I think it's a very good product, pitched at the right place. Time will tell if it succeeds. What of the next M? Looking at the list above, I'm not sure I'd change much. If Leica offers the best sensor (less defects, better dynamic range across usable ISOs, 24 MP), and it retains the fabulous rangefinder (but with single framelines), I'd be happy (effectively an upgraded, production version of the m Edition 60). But for others, they will want the benefits that go wit ha CMOSis sensor - Live view, video and EVF. Leica is the only digital camera maker that offers an EVF with focus assistance etc that is fixed in the centre spot. It isn't an advantage or point of difference they can boast about ... The rest of the electronic wizardry? Well, for me, it all just dilutes Leica's point of difference with the M camera - particularly when the EVF looked close to obsolete when it was first released. I rather hope (at a minimum) Leica's next iteration is a perfect version of the M(240) which justifies the price tag. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2014 Share #500 Posted December 8, 2014 Actually I think the firmware is not bad at all...But then I’m not a software geek. What’s wrong is that something that’s wrong and could be fixed by changing mentality . Leica is clearly not a software company, and does not realize that photography has been changing during the years and is moving from a hardware only business to a predominantly software business. They need to do something quick if they do not want to be eventually stuck forever in the lens only business (like Zeiss, and that's not that bad). There are two solutions: 1) Develop your own software in-house, and protect your IP because you think your software is more advanced than the competition. This needs a lot of resources, and is something even giants like Canon, Nikon, and especially Sony are struggling to do right. 2) Use an open OS (Linux, Android, ...), keep a couple developers to half-bake the usual meh firmware on that, and then immediately release the open source project and let the community enhance the camera. If properly done, even end users will be able to configure their own firmware a-la-carte, selecting the firmware branch they like (minimalistic, geeky, etc) and which features to enable, all from their web-browser. Soon you will have a much better camera for free, as people will fix and enhance your product out of passion for photography and tecnology. In my opinion, it is clear that Leica (and not only) should go for solution 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.