thighslapper Posted November 2, 2014 Share #201 Posted November 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I was actually referring to your post in which you mentioned you are unable to get the right metering and focus without the help of the LCD preview. If what you said is true, I think you need to work more on your technique rather than relying on the LCD to show you what you did wrong. Fortunately I get my exposures and focus very fine the first time, and most of my images are one time shots that are unrepeatable, so either I get the shot the first time or I don't. I just like to review my shots too often, which I find distracts me from finding other photo opportunities. .... errr ..... that isn't what I said........ I was pointing out that use of the LCD greatly increases the chances of taking home technically acceptable images as any errors are picked up instantly. Many of the so-called iconic images of the 20th century are in fact technically deficient ...... and that is after processing ..... so god knows what the negatives were like. I suspect most of the great photographers of the pre-digital generation would have given their right arm for an LCD on the back of their cameras. I'm very happy that you have reached a point of photographic perfection where you don't actually need to review images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 2, 2014 Posted November 2, 2014 Hi thighslapper, Take a look here M(240) Edition 60. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted November 2, 2014 Author Share #202 Posted November 2, 2014 Okay, so it's getting to crunch time, and I need to either confirm or cancel my pre-order of the M Edition 60. Let's look at the pros & cons. 1. Price This is the killer. The price is $18,500. Against that, I can get an M-P for $8,000, and the Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH for $5,500. That means the white gloves and the leather case (with lugs and strap) is costing $5,000. I also get stainless steel, Audi design, exclusivity thrown in, and the knowledge that this camera is really unlikely to be made as a production camera. If I want a camera like this, then this will be my only opportunity. It's not a huge premium (bearing in mind the price of previous special editions), and I'm not sure it is a total disincentive to actually use this camera. I can fund it from the sale of my Nikon gear (already gone) and my MP (on eBay). 2. No Live View This effectively means no video (which is of no interest), no EVF (which sounds like it isn't as good as the Visoflex provided with my Leica T), but more critically I can't use non-coupled lenses (I have only one, and no R lenses), long telephotos or take macro. From others' posts (Jono & Tim), it sounds like focus peaking hasn't been what many of us had hoped for, and it certainly doesn't sound like a solution for focus shift on legacy lenses (not that I have any). I don't like focusing and framing using the LCD on my Leica T, and the EVF sounds less than state of the art, so I'm not particularly bothered by Live View, I don't think. I should add that I do think having two viewfinders (one optical and one a reasonably indifferent EVF) is a kludge - the various grip options just make the camera more confused to my mind. I don't like the external viewfinder for my 21mm lens, and I don't think this is a viable longterm arrangement - if the M is a rangefinder camera, then I think it should just be one. Sticking a cheaply made (by someone else) over-priced electronic viewfinder on top of a camera which already has an apparently very fine rangefinder is extremely unattractive to me as a design solution. 3. No LCD This has more critical consequences. The obvious one is no Jpegs. I don't chimp, and I don't find it helps my photography one little bit (other than confirming focus, framing and exposure - all of which I should have got right in the first place; and it won't help, as the photo opportunity will have gone by the time I realise I screwed up). There's been a lot written here about chimping, and I can understand for professional photographers, setting up lighting and scenes in controlled, static environments, having a Jpeg to check, rather than the bother of a polaroid, is useful. I don't really think this camera is aimed at this sort of work, and I'm not interested anyway. I had a polaroid back for my Hasselblad, and in real life, it wasn't much use for me. What chimping does is shift my attention from the scene I'm photographing to fussing over my camera - it is a critical change in concentration which is fatal to the way I take pictures. I can't become absorbed by the scene, or interact with the subject, if I'm fiddling about with the technology like a teenager who spends more time posting about his life on Facebook than actually living it. Put another way, for many years I stopped taking pictures altogether because I was viewing the world through a viewfinder, rather than living it. So, if I'm not reviewing the images at the time, what else does the LCD provide? The opportunity to share images with others (this isn't a small issue, but it does make your photos more personal), and it makes other settings and reviews more difficult, or irrelevant. Contrary to what I say above, the histogram on the Monochrome is actually quite useful at times. But to me, that is particular to the Monochrom, as blown highlights are more of an issue when you're only dealing with B&W. No self-timer is a problem, but I have had confirmation that Leica will fit a threaded shutter release button for me. Exposure compensation is useful, but can be managed in Manual mode (not a huge sacrifice). Similarly, bracketing can be useful, but what tends to happen is I turn on bracketing, and then forget it is on, firing off a couple of extra shots I wasn't expecting as I take the camera away from my eye ... It is a rare image that I don't know may require a second under or over exposure. I don't know how sensor cleaning will be dealt with, but everything else seems to be taken care of. I expect software updates will be dealt with by inserting the SD card with the update on it, and turning on the camera with the second button depressed, if software updates are actually needed. What for, exactly? So, those are the potential negatives, what are the positives? I'm coming from an M9P, so I get a quieter shutter (big deal), a better sensor (18MP to 24MP) with apparently better files, bigger buffer (not really relevant) and a better optical viewfinder. They are all genuine steps up from what I have, if I understand general comment here correctly. I also gain direct manual control of ISO, Shutter, aperture and focus - photography reduced to its essentials, and I lose the screen (which is a positive). So, the remaining balancing issues are price and the loss of some of the benefits of the CMOS sensor (live view, mostly, with the ability to expose, frame and focus what the sensor will capture and video). My Leica T seems more appropriate to this style of photography, or a GoPro. As someone who would actually use this camera, is there anything I have missed or misunderstood? Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 2, 2014 Share #203 Posted November 2, 2014 John, I think you have made all the points necessary to show that it is simply a silly product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted November 2, 2014 Share #204 Posted November 2, 2014 I thought you were bright enough not to need things spelling out for you but the difference between a polaroid preview (for it is when used as a preview not as an end product that we are discussing instant film) and looking at an LCD preview of a digital shot is that in the case of the latter you are viewing a preview of the actual end photograph. The polaroid qua preview is typically used to check lighting ratios and/or static composition. I think even people like you know what Wenders is driving at, we don't have to be so literal and anal about everything. Wenders might be wrong, I'm not sure how much I care, but I know I'm more interested to know what he (with his creative track record) has to say than someone like Anne Geddes. Wow, lots of condescension in your reply. And you missed the point about the Anne Geddes interview. She was making a point similar to Wenders' point, i.e. about what was lost with digital. But her Polaroid story then reveals that her analog photography had the same type of interruptions as digital, i.e., people annoying crowding around to see the preview, and the photographer herself eager to examine it. In other words, the story inadvertently counters her own romanticism about analog photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 2, 2014 Author Share #205 Posted November 2, 2014 John, I think you have made all the points necessary to show that it is simply a silly product. Thanks for that, Pico. Very helpful, informative, well reasoned ... we're so much better off for that contribution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2014 Author Share #206 Posted November 3, 2014 Wow, lots of condescension in your reply. And you missed the point about the Anne Geddes interview. She was making a point similar to Wenders' point, i.e. about what was lost with digital. But her Polaroid story then reveals that her analog photography had the same type of interruptions as digital, i.e., people annoying crowding around to see the preview, and the photographer herself eager to examine it. In other words, the story inadvertently counters her own romanticism about analog photography. I guess Ian's point is that no amount of preview was going to improve Anne Geddes images. She's not really my cup of tea either, I'd have to say. However, her images are staged, in controlled lighting and mostly in a studio - polaroids and preview are useful in those conditions. I'm not really sure that this sort of photography plays to the Leica M's strengths. S camera, maybe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted November 3, 2014 Share #207 Posted November 3, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I guess Ian's point is that no amount of preview was going to improve Anne Geddes images. She's not really my cup of tea either, I'd have to say. However, her images are staged, in controlled lighting and mostly in a studio - polaroids and preview are useful in those conditions. I'm not really sure that this sort of photography plays to the Leica M's strengths. S camera, maybe. Ok, it's clear that you're not interested in what she actually says in the interview and just want to bash her photography. Let's forget that I mentioned it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2014 Author Share #208 Posted November 3, 2014 Ok, it's clear that you're not interested in what she actually says in the interview and just want to bash her photography. Let's forget that I mentioned it. I thought we were discussing the benefits of preview ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted November 3, 2014 Share #209 Posted November 3, 2014 .... errr ..... that isn't what I said........ I was pointing out that use of the LCD greatly increases the chances of taking home technically acceptable images as any errors are picked up instantly. Many of the so-called iconic images of the 20th century are in fact technically deficient ...... and that is after processing ..... so god knows what the negatives were like. I suspect most of the great photographers of the pre-digital generation would have given their right arm for an LCD on the back of their cameras. I'm very happy that you have reached a point of photographic perfection where you don't actually need to review images. I'm pretty sure this is exactly what you said, but it's not important anyway. All the so-called iconic images of the 20th century were fleeting moments in time that no amount of chimping would have corrected the deficiencies. They were decisive moments that lasted a fraction of a second. If they tell us anything, it's that it's not necessary to be a great technician to take great photos but a keen photographic vision is. Even then, guys like HCB stubbornly refused to use an incident light meter, a common practice at the time that ensured properly exposed photos, and relied on his own guessing that was mostly wrong most of the time. Miscalibrated RF were easy to check by shooting a test roll, not unlike what I do now with my digital M, shooting test shots and inspecting them on my monitor, not camera LCD. If the iconic images are not technically perfect, it's because the photographer didn't have time or didn't even care for technical perfection. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted November 3, 2014 Share #210 Posted November 3, 2014 All the so-called iconic images of the 20th century were fleeting moments in time that no amount of chimping would have corrected the deficiencies. False. Not all of them were fleeting moments, and many of them were even staged. If today's technology had been available, we would have much more great images of the 20th century to enjoy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 3, 2014 Share #211 Posted November 3, 2014 Okay, so it's getting to crunch time, and I need to either confirm or cancel my pre-order of the M Edition 60. You state a case, I think, for giving the M60 a whirl and, I also think, it is reasonably low risk because you'll probably be able to sell it without making much, or any, loss (though it is a very slow seller's market at the moment so I wouldn't assume an easy profit or anything like that). On the other hand, I don't think I'd want to spend £8,000 equivalent on any Leica digital rangefinder, especially one that is in the last year of the base product lifecycle. I no longer feel there is sufficient value at this kind of price level and I've personally had a few too many problems in recent years to feel comfortable having too much invested in Leica digital RFs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 3, 2014 Author Share #212 Posted November 3, 2014 There's lots of packaging that can change, but with this camera, it's only the sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted November 3, 2014 Share #213 Posted November 3, 2014 Even then, guys like HCB stubbornly refused to use an incident light meter, a common practice at the time that ensured properly exposed photos, and relied on his own guessing that was mostly wrong most of the time. A myth about HCB — that he stubbornly refused to use a light meter. Not true. Quote from the 1971 interview by Sheila Turner-Seed: "During the day, I don’t need a light meter. It is only when light changes very quickly at dusk or when I’m in another country, in the desert or in the snow. But I guess first, and then I check. It is good training." — HCB So in fact he did use one. He didn't "need" a light meter as trained himself to not need it, but he had it with him and occasionally used it, such as "when light changes very quickly at dusk or when I’m in another country, in the desert or in the snow." Ishu Patel relates how in 1965, HCB "judged the light by eye, although he carried a small light meter in his pants pocket." Well into his career he was still carrying a light meter in his pants pocket in order to ... never use it? No, he used it, just not very often. He knew when he didn't need it, which was probably most of the time, but he also had it with him for when the light changes quickly or when he wanted to check his guess. Was HCB "mostly wrong most of the time"? Unlikely. Patel relates that in reviewing HCB's contact sheets, "all his exposures were perfect." That's not by accident, but by virtue of the training and determination that he describes above. And besides, during the day it's pretty easy to memorize a few standard settings for sunny, hazy, cloudy, open shade and deep shade. HCB was not so technically carefree as people make him out to be. He knew the importance of good exposure and kept training himself to achieve it, without a light meter ... or with a light meter on occasion. He even rolled his own film from bulk to be sure it was from the same batch number. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 3, 2014 Share #214 Posted November 3, 2014 There's lots of packaging that can change, but with this camera, it's only the sensor. True, but it's the sensor that has been the component that has given me most problems in recent years. Admittedly, the M240 has a better reliability record than the Truesense CCD sensors but I'm personally no longer fully confident that my digital Leica cameras (now down to just a Monochrom) have a long expense-free future beyond the warranty expiration so I'm now more wary about investing too much in this kind of product. £2-4K ok, £6-8K, less so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted November 3, 2014 Share #215 Posted November 3, 2014 I suspect most of the great photographers of the pre-digital generation would have given their right arm for an LCD on the back of their cameras. I agree ... most would have valued an LCD very highly, because it's a fantastic light meter. They would have been smart enough not to check it after every shot or when there were fleeting moments to capture, but rather when the light changes, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 3, 2014 Share #216 Posted November 3, 2014 True, but it's the sensor that has been the component that has given me most problems in recent years. Admittedly, the M240 has a better reliability record than the Truesense CCD sensors but I'm personally no longer fully confident that my digital Leica cameras (now down to just a Monochrom) have a long expense-free future beyond the warranty expiration so I'm now more wary about investing too much in this kind of product. £2-4K ok, £6-8K, less so. Umm... Most reports about sensor defects after guaranty expiration are cost-free replacement . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 3, 2014 Share #217 Posted November 3, 2014 Thanks for that, Pico. Very helpful, informative, well reasoned ... we're so much better off for that contribution. The real deal killer is the box! Unpack that thing in total darkness, leave the room, slam the door, wash your hands, call the packaging police! Now lets move on to the important stuff. Is the air inside the camera German or Portuguese? Winter or Summer? . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 3, 2014 Share #218 Posted November 3, 2014 Umm... Most reports about sensor defects after guaranty expiration are cost-free replacement . That is hardly the point when you have to wait months for Leica to get stock. Besides which you are wrong to assume that the no-cost sensor replacement policy is universal and always forthcoming. I have experience to the contrary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 3, 2014 Share #219 Posted November 3, 2014 Well, then you must be least.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 3, 2014 Share #220 Posted November 3, 2014 Well, then you must be least.... Least what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.