sdai Posted June 14, 2007 Share #141 Posted June 14, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well - it is a market like the stock market.If people panic or have just some anxious phantasy because there are some unsubstantial, absurd rumours - the price falls immediate and extremely - not regarding the real objective value. People are like that. That's not panic really, Dirk. A pocket book may be the last thing a Leicaphile needs to worry about ... dare I mention about "fashion"? People are always after the latest and greatest, young chicks are always more popular than old ladies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 14, 2007 Posted June 14, 2007 Hi sdai, Take a look here Future of the "R" series. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
brunom Posted June 14, 2007 Share #142 Posted June 14, 2007 Manual focus doesn't get confused by textured backgrounds the way AF does when photographing flying birds: All photos: Leicaflex SL, 400mm f/6.8 telyt, hand-held Doug Hi The 2 raptor photos - are they Lammergeyers ? Regards Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogopix Posted June 15, 2007 Share #143 Posted June 15, 2007 I can't agree more with you on this, Doug ... some people just don't realize what they've got with a 1.5x, 1.6x or even 2x camera are only PART of the image. All the "advantages" of a cropped camera were nothing more than marketing BS Nikon, Olympus, and others used to persuade people buying into their inferior products. Now here's something I've put on photo.net for quite some time ... my 1Ds was the first one "unofficially" sold in Canada by the way. LOL 300/2.8IS handheld. 400/5.6 handheld. 500/4 handheld ... Now, Doug ... with manual focus, how can I get these shots while holding my camera with my right hand, and turning the focusing ring with my left hand? LOL What was the level of sharpening in these images? The texture of the last one in particolar looks quite post sharpened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogopix Posted June 15, 2007 Share #144 Posted June 15, 2007 Manual focus doesn't get confused by textured backgrounds the way AF does when photographing flying birds: All photos: Leicaflex SL, 400mm f/6.8 telyt, hand-held In these the images seem naturally sharp against the background. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted June 15, 2007 Share #145 Posted June 15, 2007 What was the level of sharpening in these images? The texture of the last one in particolar looks quite post sharpened. These were posted on photo.net long time ago and I honestly can't remember what I've done with them exactly, Victor ... in fact, the last one was only 1/4 a crop from the original image shot at ISO800, as I've mentioned in one of my previous posts, the last two suffered severely from excessive noise massaging in PS and then I probably applied too much sharpening to "restore" some textures. But these images are not posted to show how good they are ... it was to demo that you can still get something after sun down close to 8pm ... which was otherwise impossible with a manual focusing system, this is the time you just pull out your gun and shoot. I have stopped shooting wildlife for more than 4 years and most of my files are offline in the archive, but this thread is all about gears or I could post more. I'm not against manual focusing at all, and I use MF cameras all the time ... but most people shouldn't object to AF because you can always turn it off if you don't like it. As to the argument that AF can be fooled by textured background, I guess it's as simple as Canon's AF 101 ... my friend John R Nelson is a good birder too (I don't even bother to show my stuff when he's around. LOL) once you learn and keep practicing, it quickly becomes second nature. John R Nelson's Bird Gallery ... AF not fooled by busy background Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted June 15, 2007 Share #146 Posted June 15, 2007 ... I surely couldn't figure out how to manually focus a 400mm or 500 mm lens handheld, close to 8pm. ISO 1600 with the DMR, 560mmm f/6.8 on a very dark day: I don't think it you that's the problem, Simon. Your 400mm and 500mm lenses were not designed to be used effectively as manual-focus hand-held lenses, and I'm willing to bet likewise for your camera's viewfinder. What I've been trying to point out all along is that the camera can be optimized for AF or for manual focus, optimizing for one will compromise its suitability for the other. Focus confirmation is like AF but without a motor as far as optimization is concerned. I've found myself in many many situations where the compositional requirements of the photo make manual focus imperative, and only an optimized manual focus system will do the job effectively. Those who have not at least looked throught the viewfinder of an SL or SL2 ought to see what a great viewfinder is like. I'm not advocating that anyone make the SL or SL2 his primary camera, just see if you can borrow one to see how good an SLR viewfinder can be. You might need a diopter correction lens because these cameras don't have built-in diopter correction adjustment, but once you get that set up correctly and try using the camera you'll see why electronic focus confirmation is pointless: an SL or SL2 viewfinder optimized for manual focus and correctly adjusted for individual eyesight is much easier and quicker to focus accurately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted June 15, 2007 Share #147 Posted June 15, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) As to the argument that AF can be fooled by textured background, I guess it's as simple as Canon's AF 101 ... my friend John R Nelson is a good birder too (I don't even bother to show my stuff when he's around. LOL) once you learn and keep practicing, it quickly becomes second nature. His flying bird photos do not have textured backgrounds. With perched birds, no big deal, the AF works fine (and so does MF). It's flying birds and textured backgrounds that cause problems. It's still a problem with the 1D Mk. III Bruno, the raptor is a Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted June 15, 2007 Share #148 Posted June 15, 2007 Doug, I hate posting my bird pics on the web because it'll only prove you're a better photographer than I could be. LOL But, I suspect all you'll see through your VF when mounted with your f/6.8 lens even wide open - will be darkness ... it took my a while to dig out some worst condition shots. I fully agree with you on the design compromise subject. But, when you have no choice and in this case, Leica is going to give you a AF camera and the new CEO has said that the customers don't always know the best, are you simply going to give up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted June 15, 2007 Share #149 Posted June 15, 2007 Simon, all I can say is that I wish I could be there to see the experssion on your face when you first look through the SL's viewfinder. Seeing is believing. As far as the R10 is concerned, the viewfinder quality will be a huge factor in determining if it's the right camera for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogopix Posted June 15, 2007 Share #150 Posted June 15, 2007 From these images it is clear we have two consumate professionals, with talent we others only dream about. Yes, I understand discussion is about gears, and I often use AF. I am keen to understand different approaches. I am big MF/MF (medium format, manual focus ) fan, mostly because I use Contax 645. I also have R9 and M8 and MANY long lenses. On coontax with otherwise excellent lenses, where AF works exceptionally well in normal shot, wildlife is a problem. I am constantly taking off AF on Contax or I use combination (Contax is made with ability, in AF mode to decouple at half shutter and then manually focus for the shot. It is best of both worlds.) However with Telyt Leicas, I have been practicing with the 400 and 560 6.8 and I find that when images hit, they are more often in focus. I am off to austria for trek, and may have some images to post (as long as not near anything from these two birders!) Wonderful images and I hope Leica if they produce an AF system do it with a really capable system. Then we of the medicare crowd can continue to improve! regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 15, 2007 Share #151 Posted June 15, 2007 Some of you might not visit the M8 forum, for those that do, my apologies for the double posting. And proper deference to Doug. Long lenses on SLR's are not always needed, nor autofocus. If the R10 ever comes, I will use my old Noflexar 400 follow-focus on it. But for now rangefinder stuff. I do feel that with the seagull shots autofocus would have had difficulty focussing on the beak/eye. It could just as well have chosen a wingtip.Nor could it have differentiated between the dolphin and the wave. As such it is a limited tool. Tele-Elmarit 135-4.0 on M8 And a bit of wet wildlife, Summilux 75 on M8: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsolomon Posted June 15, 2007 Share #152 Posted June 15, 2007 Doug, i have looked thru the viewfinder of an SL.... it it noticablly brighter then the R9....but why...? my understanding is light must be "taken away or directed" towards the metering system ? After all the years isn';t there some type of coating that can "restore" the redirected lost light ? thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicar7 Posted June 15, 2007 Share #153 Posted June 15, 2007 Richard, The SL and SL2 diverted 20% of the light coming through the lens to a small rectanglar secondary mirror hinged behind the main mirror to the light meter cell in the bottom inside of the mirror box. All cameras from R4 on divert a greater percentage using a secondary mirror that is essentially the size of the main mirror. The bottom surface of the SL/SL2 pentaprism is convex and acts as a condenser, gathering more light into the pentaprism than would a flat surface. Too, the field of the focussing screen is not ground glass, but covered with triangular microprisms, which allow contrast focussing all over the image outside of the 7mm coarse microprism with or without the split image focussing device. The apparent viewfinder magnification is also 0.86. All these aspects result in the brightest, easiest manual focussing viewfinder that any SLR has ever had, bar none. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted June 16, 2007 Share #154 Posted June 16, 2007 All these aspects result in the brightest, easiest manual focussing viewfinder that any SLR has ever had, bar none. What Thomas wrote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted June 16, 2007 Share #155 Posted June 16, 2007 Sounds like I'd better take a look an SL2 ... I can never resist an autofocus/manual focus debate. A couple of shooting experiences stand out for me. One, a day shooting at model aeroplanes. I stood out at the end of the runway and shot the modellers' machines as they came swooping by, being flown as smoothly as possible. The grew in the viewfinder slowly at first and then very quickly. It was damn near impossible to keep the F5's autofocus sensor on the aircraft and I was soon feeling sick from trying. That was with 300 and 400 auto lenses. So I switched to an R8 with 400/2.8 Modul lens, not expecting it to be easier - but it was! All of a sudden I was freed of having to keep the bloody sensor on the aircraft. I simply jinked the focus closer every second or so, keeping the plane in front of the plane (hehe), until the size was looking good, waited for the plane to fly into the focal plane and shot. I got keepers with almost every shot. Not what I expected. The other example relates to shooting fast moving birds in tightly composed up close shooting conditions. The freedom that comes from having a few million focus sensors (i.e. everywhere on the ground glass screen, with my brain doing the autofocus) makes for great compositions and far fewer tail feathers or claws being cut off. As Mark Rabiner over on the Leica Users Group says - "I am autofocus!" I don't mind if the R10 is autofucus but it's not something I'd buy it for. From reading the interview with Stephen Lee in LFI it seems like it will have focus confirmation at least. But it just has to be completely compatible with manual R lenses. I'm worried that an autofocus body will take away from design and production of new manual R lenses. I have wondered if we'd see a Panasonic autofocus body with R bayonet and some new auto lenses to go with it, also accepting traditional R lenses. This might make room for the R10 to be left with manual or focus confirmation only. An aside - I finally bought the 150 and 200 mm PRO lenses for the RT-m projector and holy cow do they work well with good slides mounted in Gepe 3mm anti-newton mounts. Luminous, sharp, detailed, colourful, breathtaking and jaw dropping. ISYN. So good that I'll be sticking with slides for the forseeable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted June 16, 2007 Share #156 Posted June 16, 2007 ...Sounds like I'd better take a look an SL2 ..... . after all the discussions here about the SL2 the prices will be going up.. :D ...I have my two pices... .. regards, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted June 16, 2007 Share #157 Posted June 16, 2007 Rick. It's good that you're sticking with Slides, after all is there an alternative. Leica Glass and transparances go hand in hand. I have the SL, but I retired it some time ago. Cannot use Rom Lenses, no motor drive, Manual metering only, diffilcult to get Meter batteries for it, and as well I need a Diopter for it. And to be frank, I find the R7/8 and 9 viewfinder excellent. Loved the SL, but like me it's vintage. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hektor Posted June 16, 2007 Share #158 Posted June 16, 2007 I have the SL, but I retired it some time ago. Dear Ken, Knowing you, I bet the SL will not be retired for long. Justin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted June 17, 2007 Share #159 Posted June 17, 2007 I have the SL, but ... Cannot use Rom Lenses... Recognizing the other limitations of the SL, many ROM lenses can be used on the SL with very minor modifications to the lens and body, in no way altering the performance of either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted June 17, 2007 Share #160 Posted June 17, 2007 Justin. You might be right, I might send my SL to Germany for a service. I damaged my Viewfinder plastic housing with my belt buckle some time ago. Most likely will need a new one, so a full service would'nt hurt. Doug, I could'nt justify the expence, I can use the 50,90,180 mm and the 35-70mm 3.5 (Minolta version)on it. Though I must admit I kind of miss the sound of that super shutter. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.