Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
StephenPatterson

No focus peaking???

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am not making an argument. I am trying to show you and others that some people find ways to use cameras that you may not get. It has nothing to do with the T but you were the one who wrote about the A7r saying the A7r promises more than it can deliver when the opposite seems to be true in this example.

 

Not at all. The shutter shock seems to me to be a fundamental flaw in the A7r in its core purpose - that and its AF and frustrating MF capabilities. If you have a 36MP sensor, touted as the best in the business, why hamstring it with two critical flaws - movement in the mechanism and difficulties nailing focus (unless, of course, you choose to use a massive, expensive and complex mount which probably has its own case).

 

More critically, you selectively quoted from my post which made the more relevant point that the T camera is not designed to do much of what you criticise it for (not being "professional" or not having the ability to take an external mount and headphones).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not for me. Are you implying they should?

 

Two can play.

 

Jeff

 

I find a lot of pleasure in not getting lost as often and being able to know my doors are locked and get a message to my phone if someone is trying to break in and steal my cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not at all. The shutter shock seems to me to be a fundamental flaw in the A7r in its core purpose - that and its AF and frustrating MF capabilities. If you have a 36MP sensor, touted as the best in the business, why hamstring it with two critical flaws - movement in the mechanism and difficulties nailing focus (unless, of course, you choose to use a massive, expensive and complex mount which probably has its own case).

 

More critically, you selectively quoted from my post which made the more relevant point that the T camera is not designed to do much of what you criticise it for (not being "professional" or not having the ability to take an external mount and headphones).

 

What I am trying to get at is why not make posts that show how the T can stand on its own merits? And how you think you will benefit from them.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find a lot of pleasure in not getting lost as often and being able to know my doors are locked and get a message to my phone if someone is trying to break in and steal my cameras.

 

Was that a 'yes' to my question?

I already know you like this stuff. But my question wasn't about you. Are you really implying I should like all these features?

 

If so, no wonder this is going nowhere. To each his own, as long as that's consistent with your own?

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was that a 'yes' to my question? I already know you like this stuff. But my question wasn't about you. Are you really implying I should like all these features?

 

If so, no wonder this is going nowhere. To each his own, as long as that's consistent with your own?

 

Jeff

 

I don't know you and have no idea what you would like.

 

What I have been steadily consistent on is trying to differentiate here between opinions and facts. I am sorry if the analogy did not cut it for you. I can like different kinds of cars and I can like different kinds of cameras. But what does likes have to do with it? E.g. a simple interface does not become bloated with the addition of IBIS, a built in EVF, an HDMI port and a way to use a remote release. And I will get navigation and SXM radio and probably paddle shifters in my next sports car and it won't diminish the driving experience. Once you have some features you start to appreciate them.

 

So how come those items (IBIS, built in EVF, HDMI port, remote release) are not accepted as things that would be nice to have in even a minimalist's camera? Which begs the question, why would anyone leave them out if they had the capability to include them? They are not tick boxes and they are not bloat. So leave those overused slurs out and make a reasoned argument for not including them in an APS camera that sells for a premium price..

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know you and have no idea what you would like.

 

Exactly.

 

Funny how that perspective seems lacking elsewhere in this thread.

 

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Exactly.

 

Funny how that perspective seems lacking elsewhere in this thread.

 

Jeff

 

Why not just stick to explaining what the T's merits are and see if you can convince me. I am not dissing it. Can you answer my question below?

 

How come those items (IBIS, built in EVF, HDMI port, remote release) are not accepted as things that would be nice to have in even a minimalist's camera? Are there good reason to leave them out? Would you like to see them in a future version? Anything else?

 

Do you feel the unique interface and construction plus the lenses make up for the exclusion of these items? If so, do you think many others will feel that way?

 

This is called a dialog. If you don't want to engage, what is your objective? I am just participating in a camera enthusiast discussion for the heck of it. This is just a hobby and has no meaning beyond that.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come those items (IBIS, built in EVF, HDMI port, remote release) are not accepted as things that would be nice to have in even a minimalist's camera?

 

 

Well I think they would all be welcome additions for me, especially an internal EVF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not just stick to explaining what the T's merits are and see if you can convince me. I am not dissing it. Can you answer my question below?

 

How come those items (IBIS, built in EVF, HDMI port, remote release) are not accepted as things that would be nice to have in even a minimalist's camera?

 

We are from different planets in regard to camera critiques. I haven't posted a single commentary about the camera here, nor will I, for the simple reason that I have zero need, and zero credibility, to critique any camera I've never tried. And even less need (if less than zero is possible) to critique a camera that I have no need or desire to try or own, let alone in an attempt to convince you or anyone else. (Not that it should matter to anyone, but I prefer cameras with an optical VF…not EVF. The T doesn't have one, but so what? That doesn't make it a good or bad camera, or a good or bad value, just a camera that wouldn't appeal to me.)

 

If a camera meets my needs and preferences, I'm happy. If it doesn't, I pass. I'm happy to share my views with others about my actual camera experiences, not hypothetical ones, and I don't expect anyone else to agree. Why should they? If I like a camera, but feel it could be improved by a certain feature, I'll say so. But how could I possibly know that until I put it to use….in ways that may not matter to others.

 

My posts here were merely in reaction to some really strange (for me) discussion. Which is why I stuck to cars instead.

 

Carry on.

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps informing potential buyers that mic and earphone jacks are omitted will be helpful to just one person.

 

Consider it a public service.

 

Given the liberal exchange policies of B&H, Adorama et al this isn't as heroic as it sounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I am trying to get at is why not make posts that show how the T can stand on its own merits? And how you think you will benefit from them.

 

I performed a multi-year experiment using myself as the test dummy to determine what camera functions I require and which ones I can do without. This experiment was my response to the runaway feature-itis and technology chasing which is increasingly common in photographic equipment.

 

The experiment was conducted before digital FWIW. The experiment was performed by eliminating convenience features until my photos suffered for it.

 

I found that the minimum features I want in my camera are:

 

a bright viewfinder which can be used to focus anywhere in the image area

a smooth accurate shutter

TTL viewing, focussing & metering

Automatic aperture

manual shutter, aperture & focus controls

highest quality lenses with good ergonomic design

sturdy, no-nonsense construction

 

 

The features I found I can do entirely without include:

 

fast frame rate

auto exposure

auto focus

focus 'points' that don't cover the entire viewfinder

electromechanical stabilization

flash

 

 

Fast forward a few years to digital and my needs are nearly the same with the addition of

 

want: robust raw files, ability to review histogram

 

don't need: auto white balance, jpeg output, movies

 

would be nice: live histogram

 

Not having used the Leica T I can't say how well it meets my wants and don't wants but notice how many of the features you've listed are on my want list. Before digital the camera that best met my needs was the Leicaflex SL. I'm still looking for the digital equivalent.

Edited by wildlightphoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK and that makes sense but I guess I was thinking of limiting this to the T.

 

Just to show how we are driven by different needs, some requirements are the 17TSE, and tethering to C-1. Since nobody else makes a 17 TSE that limited me to Canon cameras regardless of anything else on the market. The A7r can work with Canon lenses so that is another choice now. But having to use Sony tethering software via C-1 hotfolder would impose too high a usability hit for my workflow. I shoot fully manually most of the time but do use AF whenever I have lifestyle projects or fast walk-around work.

 

Today I shot rough scouting shots at a large interior project and quickly made all of the images while tripod mounted using live view. I set the lenses to f8, focused quickly, and just turned the shutter speed until the screen looked nice. Then I pressed the shutter release and bracketed exposures some via the shutter speed. That was my entire interaction with the interface and I probably could have been using any camera. It isn't much different when shooting tethered for the good shots. I never look at a meter or meter my strobes. I do look at C-1 histogram and zoom focus.

 

I was going to go more into this but explaining that my typical work needs are fairly limited does not mean that I don't appreciate having a lot of features that I rarely use. I know every feature and button on that camera cold and can adjust anything fast if I need to. The versatility means that the same camera system that can be used for interiors can be used for action, low light nightlife shots, people, and anything else. That is important when I travel.

 

I actually appreciate the bells and whistles more on the Nex 6 which I mostly use as a fun camera. The reason is that I am more likely to use that camera in poor lighting, not have a tripod or panorama head, etc. So it is great to have a lot of functions in it that can help out. I have never shot video with the 5DIII but shoot video on the Nex very often when I travel.

 

I chose the Nex 6 over all else at the time for the hi res built in EVF and the compact zoom. No similar camera was smaller and I would not have bought a larger camera. It certainly is not the photographic end all and be all, and there are more choices now that might be small enough and as good or better.

 

Just to show how I've changed, when I was young I carried a Hasselblad 500CM with prism finder, 2 backs and 50, 80, 150 for street photography even when I traveled in Europe.

 

So my needs in an APS system are much different than what I use for most of my work.

And I don't see how you can compare any APS or M4/3rds to what you need for your main work.

 

So where does the T fit in to what people want... especially if you have a camera system that does what you need. I would assume that a lot of the people here already have several cameras and don't actually need any more.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I like a camera, but feel it could be improved by a certain feature, I'll say so. But how could I possibly know that until I put it to use….in ways that may not matter to others.

 

 

Not to pick on you but you said you want an optical viewfinder and not an EVF. And would not buy a T due to this. Nobody is saying a camera that lacks specific features is a bad camera. If I were shooting sports I sure wouldn't choose a $50,000 digital Alpa. And I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying it surely is a really great camera for what it does even though I've never used one.

 

I was hoping for a bunch of people to say why the T as it stands specifically suits their needs.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was hoping for a bunch of people to say why the T as it stands specifically suits their needs.

As I have no real interest or use for this camera I have (almost) tuned out of the largely vacuous and pendulous comments going on here, but I just don't understand why anyone can comment on this camera until they have extensively used it. (Jono and a few testers and a so far very few current owners excepted).

 

I have never bought a car or camera (or any substantial investment) without test driving, or as a minimum, having real and full knowledge of its virtues and foibles. Commenting without that is, well, uninformed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a car without even seeing it last year. And so did 10.000 others over here….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I have no real interest or use for this camera I have (almost) tuned out of the largely vacuous and pendulous comments going on here, but I just don't understand why anyone can comment on this camera until they have extensively used it. (Jono and a few testers and a so far very few current owners excepted).

 

I have never bought a car or camera (or any substantial investment) without test driving, or as a minimum, having real and full knowledge of its virtues and foibles. Commenting without that is, well, uninformed.

 

I presume you know why you don't want it then. So for others...

 

Change it to why would you think this camera could be useful or appealing to you based on what you have heard or read about it. What generated so much enthusiasm for it? I was not asking for uninformed reviews.

 

And if you want a Tesla or Ferrari and some other cars, you pay in advance. I don't believe there are any new Ferraris in showrooms. I bet a lot of people have ordered the T without trying it.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was hoping for a bunch of people to say why the T as it stands specifically suits their needs.

 

Given there are so few in user's hands this hope seems unrealistic. IMHO there are several promising features of this camera but until I can see it and use it I'll reserve judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given there are so few in user's hands this hope seems unrealistic. IMHO there are several promising features of this camera but until I can see it and use it I'll reserve judgement.

 

Well I altered my question above. But the basic idea is you first establish your needs before seeing which camera is likely to fill those needs. If I'm looking for a small travel camera I won't be checking out a D4.

 

When I worked in a camera store my first questions were, "What aspects of photography are you interested in? What camera are you using now? What cameras have you been considering."

 

Of course back then we had twin lens reflexes in 120 and 127, 4x5s, 8x10s, 6x7 press cameras, 120 SLRs from Mamiya, Bronica, Hassy, Rollei, Kowa, all kinds of 35mm, Pen F, Minox, Tessina, Super 8 and 16mm movie gear. So it is a much narrower choice now. The difference between using an A7 a Canon Rebel, an M, a superzoom, a T and D4 is not that great.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I am trying to get at is why not make posts that show how the T can stand on its own merits? And how you think you will benefit from them.

 

 

Bollocks. You've not done that at any stage!

 

Look, it is what it is. The trick is to work out what it's strengths are. Many of us here have been hugely interested in the "gap filler". It has arrived.

 

The question now is - will it fill our needs? I'm curious enough to give it a try. It lacks some things I want, and has other things that are interesting. I generally trust the concept and Leica's interpretation of it - enough to give it a try.

 

I've sampled two Sony cameras and not gelled with either. What I haven't done is crow the benefits or damn the failings of this camera until I've tried it (as I have the A7r and the NEX5-n).

 

Conversely, you've damned the T camera from the start, and every opportunity, on every thread. I'm sure you don't intend it, but you're being a drag. Have you held it or tried it?

 

Spend a bit more time with your new girlfriend and hold off posting on this till you've tried the camera on its own merits.

 

Cheers

John

Share this post


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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...