Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi,

I'm intrigued to know what film you guys with M-As use?

 

I'm assuming you use B&W for slightly more latitude than slide film?

 

I find T-MAX only has +/- 0.5 stop lattitude anything more and the contrast can't be corrected to make a satisfactory image. For slide film I find you need +/- 1/3 stop so I tend to use the auto exposure on the M7 for provia 100.

 

I'd be impressed if you guys are using slide film and guessing the exposure with an M-A and getting it right without bracketing.

 

Regards, Lincoln

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I'm intrigued to know what film you guys with M-As use?

 

I'm assuming you use B&W for slightly more latitude than slide film?

 

I find T-MAX only has +/- 0.5 stop lattitude anything more and the contrast can't be corrected to make a satisfactory image. For slide film I find you need +/- 1/3 stop so I tend to use the auto exposure on the M7 for provia 100.

 

I'd be impressed if you guys are using slide film and guessing the exposure with an M-A and getting it right without bracketing.

 

Regards, Lincoln

 

Actually, I use color print film, Portra or Ektar.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I reserve M-A for negative film (b&w and color) for it's large latitude.

If I fancy for slide, one day, I would re-use my Sekonic L408 or Minolta Spotmeter F.

But a VCMeter II could be used maybe for all film.

See post #32, here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m7-mp-film-m/358433-external-light-meter-one-should-i-2.html

 

Arnaud

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have written and implied, the only limitation on the film used in my M-A, or my old M6 or M4 for that matter, is that it is 35mm.

 

IF you are new to shooting with a meterless camera (as you can tell a lot of us here are used to it), then I would suggest starting with a 400ISO B&W film, gives you lots of room for error, followed by Portra (any ISO), lots of latitude there as well. Once you are comfortable with your metering skills, meaning confident, slide film, tmax, etc won't make a difference. Go for the look you want to capture. Film delivers a starting point closer to the fantasy that is a photograph than digital.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I reserve M-A for negative film (b&w and color) for it's large latitude.....

 

I don't understand why there has to be a 'latitude' just because a camera does not have a built-in meter. Try Ektar 100, there isn't any real exposure latitude. Surely part of being a photographer means avoiding error. Or is error and 'latitude' two different things?

 

Personally, I have no real use for one or the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, these days a meterless camera forces situational awareness - 35 or 50mm lens, pre-visualization of the image and awareness of the expected exposure.

( I also enjoy the Null Replica which adds the necessity to think about focus setting before raising the camera )

I know my estimate is not always going to be perfect - so the latitude of Tri-X or Portra is there to take away the distraction of needing on the dot exposure.

 

In the past shooting Velvia on medium format or Tech Pan on 135 with a incident or spotmeter made for a technical experience ; I just don't see me working that way with the M-A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People used slide film long before in-camera metering became commonplace. Even when I had an M7 I found it often easier to use a handheld meter. No need to guess anything.

 

I agree. I started shooting Kodachrome in 1940 with an Argus C3, using my Father's GE meter that he used for his 8mm cine. In 1946, I upgraded to a Leica iiic, then to an M4 in 1969. Finally, in 1986, I got an M6 - - - my first camera with a light meter. As I shoot transparencies 95+%, I began using an incident meter when I was fortunate enough to get one of the early Norwood Directors. After it quit, I bought a Weston Master V with its cone, and finally, I acquired a Sekonic 308.

 

IMO, after 70+ years of shooting transparencies, I believe that, most of the time, a hand held incident meter results in decent exposure.

 

Just my two cents.

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both cameras. If anything, the M-A feels better finished than the MP but that is probably just post-purchase affirmative psychology at work. I don't believe there is any difference in manufacturing quality. As far as I can tell both cameras are made from the same parts with only a few minor differences related to the framelines and the absence of metering on the M-A. The dealer is talking out of his or her arse (something many dealers seem prone to do – including some who receive praise in this forum).

  • Like 9
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.

×
×
  • Create New...