The New LEICA M-P: Discreet, Faster, Harder

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Note that the number of frames per second (fps) has not been upgraded. It is just the number of shots before the buffer is full and you are stuck waiting for the camera flashing the red led (i.e. flushing the buffer to disk).

The F1 racing scenario is not a good example, as what really matters in F1 racing is the fps.

 

The speed you flush the buffer to flash is as important (if not more) than the buffer size itself in many shooting conditions.

Unfortunately, this has not been upgraded.

The M lags far behind the 1Dx speed in both fps and buffer flush speed.

 

 

 

Stronger body ? I have just heard about stronger LCD glass. And the vanilla-M has a supposedly anti-scratch screen already.

 

We don't do spray and pray like the 1Dx crowd and pray to,get one keeper out of 20 images. Simple. Refined.

[CheshireCat]

We don't do spray and pray like the 1Dx crowd and pray to,get one keeper out of 20 images. Simple. Refined.

 

Only thing that matters is the result.

Snobs are free to do otherwise.

[jdlaing]

Only thing that matters is the result.

Snobs are free to do otherwise.

 

Machine gun tactics with a camera will give you a result. Once in a hundred times.

[pico]

Machine gun tactics with a camera will give you a result. Once in a hundred times.

 

Not even that often.

.

[MarkP]

Though when taking photos of of people at family/social functions I have started shooting bursts of three frames or so. I find there is always someone who has blinked with their eyes closed or half-closed and at least one of the three photos are OK

[semi-ambivalent]

Only thing that matters is the result.

Snobs are free to do otherwise.

 

You're correct with your first sentence although it's not explicitly true in this context. I happen to believe that skill levels vary inversely with habitual frame rates. Almost everything else in an exposure, other than framing, is handled by the camera. No bragging rights to be had there.

 

Your second sentence? Methinks you doth complain too much. Lurk some CaNikon boards sometime, if you think snobbery is strictly Leica's turf you're not paying attention. Leica just lets you be pompous with a lighter bag.

 

)

s-a

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica just lets you be pompous with a lighter bag.

 

 

 

...and wallet .

[CheshireCat]

Machine gun tactics with a camera will give you a result. Once in a hundred times.

 

 

Well, considering 12fps, I get a result every 8.3 seconds

 

Jokes apart, it really depends on the context. It is impossible for a human to capture the exact (ideal) moment/expression/composition during fast action. It is really a matter of milliseconds, and mechanical delays make this even harder.

 

So yes, sometimes I spray&pray, and then select the best frame.

 

I also agree with MarkP. Even during slow action, the blink of an eye can ruin a shot, and this happens in... the blink of an eye

 

I even spray&pray perfectly still scenes, when I hold a 200mm at 1/10s to keep the noise low. Dramatically increases the chances of getting a crisp shot.

 

Technology allows us to increase the chances of getting a great shot. Why shouldn't we use it ?

People can say I was just lucky, and my 1Dx is a better "photographer" than I am.

I don't care. The only thing that matters is people enjoying photography.

[farnz]

… I even spray&pray perfectly still scenes, when I hold a 200mm at 1/10s to keep the noise low. Dramatically increases the chances of getting a crisp shot. ...

Although it probably works for you it's subject to the law of diminishing returns because by 'bursting' the camera keeps its sensor on for longer, which means more heat is developed which introduces more thermally-generated noise. As the saying goes: there's no such thing as a free lunch.

 

Pete.

[jaapv]

Machine gun tactics with a camera will give you a result. Once in a hundred times.

 

Only if you are shooting at 1/100th. When you use 1/1000 th it is 1:1000 as the shutter is open for that time...

[microview]

Thanks for posting Josh.

 

there are times it is useful, especially when I am shooting a classical concert and want to be sure one shot includes the entire orchestra from left to right. It could be a 50, 35 or even 24 is needed and don't want it too large to avoid excessive cropping

 

Ed

 

By the time you've fiddled about changing lenses, the soloist at least will probably have left the platform.

[Jeffry Abt]

When I shoot sports with my Nikon D4, I'm thankful for 10 frames per second. But it is not a very thoughtful process. You think about holding the camer steady and on target - that is about it! Then when the buffer is full you chimp and see what you've got. Shooting with the M is such a pleasure in comparison! The sports season is now just starting in Texas ... It will be one in twenty for thousands of captures! I spend lots of time with Photo Mechanic.

 

The expanded buffer on the M-P is fine with me. I doubt it will change the way I use the M.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Jeffry Abt

[efreed2754]

By the time you've fiddled about changing lenses, the soloist at least will probably have left the platform.

 

Thanks, yet another reason to use preview to avoid lens changing. And the less lenses are changed the lower chance of dust entering on the sensor.

[bocaburger]

I'll say off the bat I thought and still think it was a misstep on Leica's part to delete the preview to begin with, regardless of their motivation for doing so. However I must say even after 45 years of being used to using it, I found it remarkably quick and easy to do without. Now I no longer miss it and there's no way I would pay to get it back.

[colint544]

I'd just like to say that I spent two weeks in Glasgow, photographing the commonwealth games with a Canon 1DX and various long lenses. I covered boxing, hockey, swimming, judo, badminton, squash, gymnastics, etc, etc. All I did, all anyone did, was spray and pray.

 

At the boxing, I sat next to a colleague - we both had 500mm lenses, and the exact same camera. When the crucial punch of the match was thrown, we were both hosing it down at 12 frames per second. I had the shot, he didn't. It could so easily have been the other way around. A lot can happen between those frames.

 

Anyway,shooting sport on a long lens with a pro DSLR is artless. The camera does everything. You hope for the best, and that's it. I don't know how anyone can do that full time. You'd have to be obsessed with sport I suppose.

 

In my own time, I shoot an M2, M6, and an M Monochrom. Mostly with a 50mm or 28mm lens. Now, that's fun. That's taking photographs. Shooting a rangefinder is, for me, the ultimate antidote to creating editorial images for my employers.

 

Best wishes all,

 

Colin

Edited August 28, 2014 by colint544

[MarkP]

In my own time, I shoot an M2, M6, and an M Monochrom. Mostly with a 50mm or 28mm lens. Now, that's fun. That's taking photographs.

 

 

+1

[jmahto]

It is so hard to pick one from 10 almost identical pictures... and time consuming.... (when using spray and pray).

[jmahto]

......Anyway,shooting sport on a long lens with a pro DSLR is artless. ....

 

Colin

 

Well said.

[pico]

Anyway, shooting sport on a long lens with a pro DSLR is artless

 

I hope we can simply disagree.

 

Fast action sports photography puts the photographer close to the potential of the camera, but it remains for the photographer to have the skill, experience in the sport and reflexes/pre-visualization to make the profound image. An inept photographer depends upon luck while a specialist pro know when to expose: he knows the moment. It is easy to determine by their outcomes and number/frequency of exposures.

 

I worked for several years beside two acknowledged, excellent sports photographers. They got it and all I could was appreciate. While this was before autofocus, each succeeded with every iteration of technology.

 

Peace

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeffry Abt]

Anyway,shooting sport on a long lens with a pro DSLR is artless. The camera does everything. You hope for the best, and that's it. I don't know how anyone can do that full time. You'd have to be obsessed with sport I suppose.

 

I guess I asked for this comment, but I think you have a gone a bit too far. I know sports guys that always get the pivotal shot... Then there are others (me) that don't. It is not easy or simple. It takes knowing the sport, anticipation, luck ( the guys that are consistently lucky are good) and hard work. There is a reason that SI pays their photographers the big bucks. They are always, consistently, dependably "lucky". But we are agreed. Shooting with a M is satisfying!

 

I like shooting sports, by the way, as opposed to 'news' work. News in generally unhappy. Some guy in a drunken stupor wrecks his car, and you are sent to get the shot. 'So-and-so' is sueing another 'so-and-so'. Fires, wrecks, murder, tax hikes, etc. When I shoot sports... When I go to the game, everyone is happy in anticipation. At the end of the game, 50% of the people are happy. Those are pretty good odds, compared to regular news.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Jeffry Abt